Atomic Bonding

Atomic Bonding

Quick note: for anyone who wants to actually read these and try to revise, i'll post 'em every Tuesday Thursday and Sunday night - and on some Saturdays, okay?

Okay, back to basics, again.

In GCSE Chemistry there are 3 main types of bonding:

• Covalent
• Ionic
• Metallic

For your exam in January, or whenever you're doing it (if you are) you should know these 3 types of bonding inside and out - at a GCSE level.

Lets start with the easiest...

Covalent Bonding

This type of bonding exists all around us, at the moment you're sitting in a room crowded with molecules 'using' covalent bonds so to speak.

A covalent bond is basically when atoms share electrons, like in the case of hydrogen gas, in which the formula is H2, Hydrogen is the lightest element with one electron on its outer shell, and the first shell (or energy level) can only hold two electrons, so hydrogen both share their electron with the other so they both have a full shell!

Here is a very helpful diagram I grabbed off Google to show you what they look like.

Covalent bonds can also be double bonded, where the atoms share 2 electrons each, or 2 groups of electrons.

This happens in oxygen, O2, where the oxygen both share two electrons, so in a sense, they both gain two! Thus filling their second energy level, or outer shell.

COVALENT ONLY HAPPENS BETWEEN TWO NON-METALS.

Ionic

Unlike covalent, ionic happens between a metal and a non metal. It is where atoms physically swap electrons, or give/lose them to gain a full outer shell, like throwing a baseball - got it?

Take table salt for that matter, also known as Sodium Chloride, or NaCl.

The first energy level on an atom can hold 2 electrons, and the second 8. Add these together and you get 10, 10 for two full outer shells. The third, for our purposes, can only hold 8 too, and this taking our grand total to 18 electrons, if it has anywhere near that many.

Sodium has 11 electrons, and Chlorine has 17, Sodium is one above 10, and Chlorine is one below 18.

Found the solution?
That's right, they 'swap' so to speak. And the sodium gives and electron to chlorine - and they are thus bonded by the charge difference due to that.

If you have 11 protons and electrons on a sodium atom, the atoms is neutral, right? 11-11=0.
However if you have 11 protons and 10 electrons on a sodium ion it is actually positively charged! 11-10=1 - however, sodium has its desired full outer shell, which all atoms want.

Quick note: for GCSE purposes, METALS ALWAYS BECOME POSITIVE. 1+, 2+ OR 3+.

Now lets look at chlorine, usually it has 17 protons and electrons, thus creating an equilibrium and a neutral charge.
An ion on the other hand has 17 protons and 18 electrons, 17-18=-1 and... a negative charge!
However, like sodium it has a full outer shell!

This is the basic theory behind ionic bonding, although they can be complex, but i'll go over that in the near future.

Metallic:

Possibly the easiest to understand but hardest to explain, but, here I go...

Metals will always have extra electrons on their outer shell, but usually no more than 3, but that doesn't matter right now - all you need to know is that metals lose electrons to gain full outer shells.

When metal atoms come together, i.e. Lithium  they give up these outer electrons and form a sea of given up electrons. This sea holds them all together.

Imagine a jam sandwich, the two slices of bread are the lines of lithium atoms, arranged in a neat form, and the jam holding the slices together is the sea of 'delocalized' electrons.

Litium has 3 electrons, if it gives up one, it has two and thus a full outer shell, so it donates an electron along with lots of other Li atoms, and forms a Li+ ion, and a delocalized electron. This sea of delocalized electrons generally holds the metal together, like the said jam. This is because the electrons are negative and the ions are positive, for our purposes.

The electrons in the metal are free to move around, this is why metals are the best conductors, as electricity is just a moving flow of electrons, a charge/coulomb.

Metallic bonding, like common sense should dictate, is strictly for metals.

Thanks, Ben.

Quick note: dissociated acids in water i.e. Sulphuric Acid H2SO4, will behave like an ionic substance in water although it is convalent due to the definition of a covanlent bond, and an acid etc. I will go over this soon.

Back To Basics

Back to the Basics.

Instead of complex things to do with physics, I thought i'd touch up on some chemistry, and try to help those revising for their January exam, like me for example. Reposting on this blog is purely for my own revision, but I thought i'd post it as my teacher says the best way to learn something is to go at it like you're teaching someone else it, so I thought I would actually try to teach others it.

The Basics.

Our old friend Mr. Atom - not Mr. Plum Pudding, Mr. Atom.

To start off, while doing chemistry - try not to mix Cu with CU - Cu is copper where as CU is carbon and uranium, and that's a pretty bad mistake to make. 

An atom is composed primarily of 3 things - a proton, a neutron and an electron but you should all know that. A proton has a relative mass of 1, a neutron of basically 1 and an electron of 1/1800 - so its a lot smaller, it barely has any mass at all. Protons and neutrons are made up of quarks, I wont speak about them, but I/we did do a "lesson" so to speak on them a while back, here. Protons and neutrons are found in the nucleus/nucleon and electrons are found 'orbiting' the nucleus or in an orbital. A proton is a positive particle and a neutron [like the word neutral] is neutral - REMEMBER, IT IS NOT NEGATIVE. Although it may have a dipole moment but that is not important. An electron is a negative particle. Since most atoms have an equal number of protons and electrons, they are neutral altogether - unless they are an ion... but i'll go over that soon.

Atoms are arranged neatly in order of groups and periods - a group represents how many atoms an element has on its outer shell and a period tells us how many shells it has. Group 0 is used because not all shells can contain 8, basically and this states that it has a full outer shell - in  basic terms.

Groups go down and periods go across. The first period contains helium, and it is in group 0. Group 0 means it has a full outer shell and is thus stable and does not need to gain any more electrons - and since it is in the first period, it only has one shell - and this is correct, helium has 2 electrons on its first energy level, and does not need any more electrons.

On the periodic table you generally have two numbers, one above the element and one below.

As shown by the diagram to the right, the number above is the "atomic number", or number of protons and the number below is the "atomic weight", or the "Relative Atomic Mass".

Not every periodic table is the same though, generally the smaller number is the atomic number, although it should specify on the actual table you are using. The atomic number (on a non-ionic element) will also be the number of electrons, as generally and atom has the same amount of protons and neutrons. So like said prior it has no net charge.

To work out the number of neutrons an atom has, simply subtract the atomic number from the weight/relative atomic mass to get said neutron number.

I.e. for Carbon: 12 - 6 = 6. So 6 neutrons.

I hope you learned something or at least jogged your memory a bit, thanks for reading.

- Ben.

String Theory

Due to recent mocking's about String Theory, I am going to do a post explaining the very basic concepts of string theory, with no math involved - although I may show the equation used to 'back-up' string theory.


String Theory basically says that all particles (ie gluons, electrons, tau's) are made up of vibrating string, that vibrate at many different 'pitches' if you want to say; these are "excitation modes."


There are two main types of String Theories, one with open string loops, and one with closed string loops. the strings with closed loops can break into open string (like snapping an elastic band in a sense) and those with closed string loops cannot break into open strings.


Like mentioned before in another post about SUSY (Super symmetry), SUSY is a big part in String Theory. When string theory contains fermions (basically elementary particles), SUSY is needed.


String Theory also tells us that there are more than our 3 general dimensions (left/right, up/down, forward/back) in some theories there are up to 14 dimensions!

There is not much to talk about while speaking about the basics of string theory, it is very complex and the math is very very hard to understand.


Here is just some of the math involved in String Theory, as you can tell - its not easy to understand.


String Theory is probably our best competitor for a T.O.E in my opinion, but it would take a lot to completely prove strings, the split apart a quark to find a string, we'd need a machine apparently as big as Jupiter!


String Theory is becoming more and more precise every day. It is the biggest and best theory of our universe.


Thanks for reading, Ben.

Methods of Terraforming

Methods of Terraforming

As I described in my last post the beginning of the terraforming process would need to include heating. A great rise in Mars' average temperature would be needed before a change was noticeable in an increase of the volume of carbon dioxide in the air. A mass increase in the average heat of the planet could be achieved through satelite mirrors which orbit Mars and direct a higher concentration of sunlight on to the planets surface - thus raising the temperature. Heating the frozen carbon dioxide on areas of the surface of Mars would achieve the desired affect of the increase of greenhouse gases in the environment. This is turn would heat the planet and this cycle would continue until optimum temperature was achieved.

I sometimes find it funny how on this planet we are desperate to decrease the number of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere however we need to increase them on Mars in order to achieve the first few steps of terraforming.

Another way that Mars could be heated is by producing power plants around the planet which have the sole purpose of making greenhouse gases. This in turn would cause the greenhouse effect which could start the 'cycle'.

After this process takes place and the heat of Mars is ok for human, animal or plant life - basic plants could be introduced to the surface able to survive some of the rest of mars' conditions. The plant life would photosynthesise and a little breathable oxygen would be introduced to Mars' environment. This would take years and would have to take place on a mass scale however the results would be amazing for the human race. Later on organisms like bacteria could be introduced and then more complex life.

Another problem that humans would have to tackle in order to make the planet habitable is Mars' lack of a magnetosphere. Since the planet does not have a magnetosphere harsh radiation would penetrate the atmosphere and harm any life living on the surface. So underground shelters or bunkers would have to be used to sustain life. 

The human race would have to make many sacrifices in order for Mars to become habitable however the end result would be magnificent - a new Earth for the human race.

Quantum Ghosts.

Quantum mechanics can describe many things, from the universe to gluons. M Theory and String Theory tell us there are 14/12 dimensions. What do these have in common though?


In quantum mechanics, particles can be in two places at once, or even everywhere at once. String theory tells us that particles can be in different dimensions.


And classical physics tells us that E.N.D. "Energy never dies."


So what happens when you die?


Where does the energy locked away in your body go?


It cant die with you, as energy cannot die.


Some people speculate ghosts to be particles in other dimensions, energy locked away in unknown dimensions, yet we can only see them at certain times. That is why we have 'sensed' ghosts, or even picked up heat signatures from them. Many people are sceptical about ghosts, they shun their existence and feel very strongly about this.


Why can't they exist, cause you can't see them? You can physically see air at room temperature, that still exists right? We have evidence toward ghosts, just since there is no physical explanation for them - we do not believe, and their existence being 'over-hyped' and 'over-exaggerated' in cinemas, movies etc.


Ghosts aren't too unrealistic, they're believable.


Exorcisms. Scary, yes I know - but real? That's for you to decide.


Many people have reported possessed people to spit up iron like fingers during an exorcism, and speaking in an unnaturally low, demonic voice - is it true? Can one's body really be possessed by a demon?


Watching footage of exorcisms is very very disturbing. Watch one if you may.


People would not go to the extent that they do in these videos of exorcisms if they weren't actually possessed. There are videos of women biting their own arm off (apparently), and it isn't CGI either. Could the devil exist in someone's soul? Many people says its all a lie. Many people would disagree.


It isn't their opinion that should matter to you, you should make your own assumptions. Its your life, right? You decide what you do... Unless you're possessed, then well - you cant. Ghosts can be anything, they could be energy manifesting itself into a human like form, or the particles in another dimension, in the shape of others. There is startling evidence toward the 'paranormal'.


What do you believe?


Thanks for reading, Ben.

The Photoelectric Effect.

In the spirit of Albert Einstein [again] i'm going to do a post on his, well what should be - most famous discovery. 

In 1905 Albert Einstein published a paper on the Photoelectric Effect [which I spoke about on Wednesday, it was in his 'Annus Mirabilis' year]. The photoelectric effect is the effect in which delocalised electrons are 'emitted' from a metal, due to the absorption of light.

Albert Einstein concluded that light is a particle, called a photon. Yet, it is also a wave. This is particle-wave duality, in light. 

These delocalised electrons can only be 'freed' if the wavelength of the light is high enough to over come to work function, i'm going to call the work function W [it is sometimes noted as Wo] - W is the amount of energy need to free an electron.

If we have red light, at a wave length of 700nm hitting sodium, will electrons be released?

In any equation you will be given W, which for sodium is 3.6x10^-19 J. 

You are given the wave length too, 700 nm, or 7x10^-7 m - you will also be told h, which is Planck's constant, or 6.626x10^-34.

If you didn't know, the energy of a photon is equal to E=hf or E=hc/λ.

So, E = (6.626x10^-34 * 3x10^8)/7x10^-7 - this equals... 

2.84x10^-19 J!

So, like Einstein found out, red light does not excite electrons enough to let them 'escape' the sodium, as it is not higher than W - or 3.6x10^-19 J.

Now onto violet light, with a wavelength of 400nm! Once again lets do our equation, but this time we'll use 4x10^-7m instead of 7.

So, E = (6.626x10^-34 * 3x10^8)/4x10^-7 - this equals... 

4.97x10^-19 J!

This is high enough to allow electrons to escape, and with a little extra math, we can work out their velocity too!

We'll use the equation: hf=W+1/2mv^2. Where hf is what we've just done, W is the work function, m is the mass of an electron and v is the velocity.

Since we know hf (we've just worked it out) as 4.97x10^-19 J, then...

4.97x10^-19 J = W+1/2mv^2.

Substitute an electrons mass and the work function of sodium into it and we get: 4.97x10^-19 J = (3.6x10^-19)+1/2(9.11x10^-31)*v^2.

You will always be given the mass of an electron, just incase theirs any confusion.

We can then work out the velocity by subtracting things from both sides.

Minus W off both sides and we get 1.37x10^-19 (4.97-3.6).

So, 1.37x10^-19 = 1/2(9.11x10^-31)*v^2.

If we times both sides by two, then divide by 9.11x10^-31 we get...

3x10^-11. The equation now states 3x10^-11 = v^2.

If we square root both sides we get the velocity, which is...

5.48x10^5 m/s - thats is incredibly fast!

Sorry for the long winded and mathematically challenging post, when you read this i'll be in Scotland somewhere so thank you for reading, once again;

Thanks for reading, Ben.

(If you're wondering why this is Ben's post since I said he was away this was saved in the drafts - as he said above he's in Scotland, thanks)

Terraforming

"All civilisations become either space faring or extinct."
-Carl Sagan

 Terraforming

Current projections show that the world's population will reach 9 billion by around 2050.

Our worlds population is currently growing at 1.15% per year.

In 40 years the population of Earth has doubled.
Doubled.

That's a growth of 3 billion per year.

We need more space - and fast.

The  more the population grows, the more food we need. The more energy we need. The more homes we need.

The more space we need.

Logically the human race needs to move and branch out from our home planet and soon. But since the space travel technology we have today isn't amazing perhaps we should looks for places closer to home, in our Solar System.

This is where terraforming comes in.

 

An artists conception of a terraformed Mars.

Humans can obviously not survive the temperatures of Mars (on average around −63 °C).
We can't survive the radiation on Mars' surface.

and without a great supply of water or a place to grow crops without an indoor maintained environment sources of nourishment would be bleak.

These problems restrict us as we need to wear space suits in order to survive for even a quick mission on planets like these.

And do you know how much these things cost?

A space suit today costs around 13-16 million dollars.

So some how I don't think a selection of the human race will be prancing around mars in these super priced suits.

We need to alter the environment of mars itself which will allow the human race to live how they are ... and their are certain ways to do this - as fantasy as it sounds.

The first step is that we would need to heat up Mars. 

The good thing about terraforming is that it is all a chain reaction - and technically it has happened before. On the planet we are on right now. Years ago our planet was riddled with lava and plate tectonics but now it is home to features like lush forests and fields. So this transformation can take place and maybe to induce it on other planets like Mars we should just look back to our distant past.

Heating up the planets temperature would start the process of a chain reaction by melting the supposed frozen carbon dioxide around Mars. Increasing the volume of carbon dioxide in the air is the basis of the 'plan'.

We all know that the basis of photosynthesis is that plants take in carbon dioxide and release oxygen right? So eventually by introducing plants or structures such as stromatolites onto the planet the planets environment could essentially become healthy enough to support human life.

Anyway, this is the basic idea of terraforming and I will be talking about it in more detail and describing some of the methods in future posts. I'm sorry for our strange blog schedule recently and we should get it back soon - (Ben is away at the moment and I will be taking over some of his posts.) But thank you for reading guys - Chris.

Albert Einstein!

"A person who never made a mistake never tried anything new." - Albert Einstein

Happy birthday to the most influential and in my opinion one of the smartest men to ever have lived! Albert Einstein, 133 years since his date of birth today. 


I take it all of you have heard of him, yes?


But I take it all of you do not know what he actually did, no?


You will all of heard have E=mc^2 but apart from that many people do not know much of Albert's work. He didn't even win his Nobel Prize for his most known equation; E=mc^2 - it was a totally unrelated (kind of) subject. 


Einstein received his Nobel Prize for his discoveries regarding the photoelectric effect, and "his contributions to Theoretical Physics."


In this post I will highlight some of Einstein's key papers.


His main papers were his theories of General and Special Relativity, these revolutionised physics as we know it. Without these papers I do not think we would be where we are today with physics. 


Einstein published 4 main papers in 1905, they are called the Annus Mirabilis papers, this translates from Latin into extraordinary year. It as an extraordinary year indeed, 4 papers published in basically 4 month, on after another.


One on Brownian Motion, which was the evidence needed to prove the atom.


One on the Photoelectric Effect, which said that light 'traveled' in particles, and were called 'quanta'. This then lead to the uprising of quantum theory. (This was published before the Brownian Motion paper).


The next was on Special Relativity, which was about electricity - and Maxwells equations to do with it. it then goes on to talk about the speed of light. 


And finally the Matter-Energy Equivalence, which contains the amazing equation E=mc^2, this paper lead to Einstein hypothesising that gravity bends light etc.


Einstein has accomplished a lot in physics, he is the most successful physicist who has ever existed in my opinion, even 65 years (approx) after his death - we still know his name. He has left a physics legacy, which lead to quantum theory and another whole branch of physics. Take some time out of your day today to appreciate the work of Albert Einstein.


Thanks for reading, Ben.

Albert Einstein!

"Any intelligent fool can make things bigger and more complex... It takes a touch of genius - and a lot of courage to move in the opposite direction."

You will rarely hear a physicist use the word genius when referring to people these day's although there is one person they will always praise.

-Albert Einstein.

The father of modern day physics Einsteins work was crucial and the basis of some of our modern physics today. You've no doubt heard of the equation E=mc^2. (otherwise, have you been living in a cave‽) this equation was created from Einsteins special relativity work and featured in his paper on mass/energy equivalence. This equation is famous worldwide and when physics is mentioned this equation is usually present in most minds today. It basically says that E (energy) = m (mass)*c (the speed of light - in a vaccumn) ^2 and in a way states that mass and energy are one of the same and can be described and equivalent.

But back to Einstein ...

Many of Einsteins papers lead to increase work in that topic and often entire branches of physics - to name a few: in one paper Einstein describes the particle/wave duality of light which later lead to De Broglies theorem of a particle/wave duality for all matter, another instance is general or special relativity which has branched into a field of physics.

It is clear why Einstein is so praised in the physics community - as well as being one of the great mind of history he was shown to set a spark of physics. In my opinion, without Einstein humans would not have near as much of a knowledge of physics than we do today.

In his time he was so famous that people would stop him on the street and ask him to explain some of his many theories - a truly unquestionable, great mind.

It is rare for a physicist from Einsteins time to escape into the world of popular culture but in Einstein's case he is the template for all manner of 'mad scientists'.

I think he accomplised a great deal in his lifetime inspiring other great minds as well as adding to his own scientific contributions.

And why the sudden Einstein post I hear you ask?

Well, there's method in the madness - tomorrow (well in the UK anyway ...) marks the 133rd Anniversary of Einstein's birth - yes, it's Einsteins birthday.

So celebrate the life of this truly great physicist, theologian and philosopher tomorrow - and maybe stop to think what physics would be life without minds like these. 
What science would be like without minds like these.
And ultimately what the world would be like. 

Thanks for reading, Chris.

T>xΔxm/h

The equation i'm going to discuss is: T > xΔxm / h


It may seem a bit large, or scary but trust me it isn't.


It is a equation, derived from Feynman's path integral equation and tells us the minimum amount of time it'd take for something to basically 'jump' out of a box. This being quantum mechanics, its a bit stranger that what we expect. Since electrons can be in two places at once, or an infinite amount. We could technically move out of a sealed box.


T = time it will take.
x = Size of box.
Δx = Amount it will move (like 5m)
m = Mass of object
h = Plancks constant.


So...


T > (10metres x 11 metres x 50 kg (you!)) / 6.626x10^-34 =....


8.3*10^36seconds!


This is around 2.623*10^29 years!


Thats way older than our universe!


But this is a giant thing, well relatively (us).


Lets try an electron.


T > (1x10*-15m x 1.1*10*-15m x 9.12*10^31kg) / 6.626*10^-34 =....


This is quite a jumble, but the answer is... 117seconds!


Thats all it takes for an electron to jump out of a tiny, tiny box. Pretty amazing right, about at least 2 minutes!


This equation like said was derived from a Feynman equations. You now know how to calculate pretty crazy sums!


Thanks for reading, Ben.

Gravitational Potential Energy Equation

Gravitational Potential Energy Equation

Today I'll be describing the basic equation for gravitational potential energy and demonstrating how to solve a few problems involving it.

To find out the Gravitational Potential Energy of an object this equation is used:

Where m is mass,

g is the gravitational field strength - which can vary in places, for example earths average gravitational field strength is 9.8N/kg.
and h is the objects height.

Problem Solving:

If a boy kicks a ball 4.5m height on planet x and another boy on planet y kicks a ball 6m, if the ball has a mass of 0.43kg which ball has the highest gravitational potential energy - the ball on planet x or the ball on planet y?

Now lets calculate the gravitational potential energy for each ball:

Planet x:

If the gravitational field strength for planet x is 5.4N/kg, g = 5.4.
we also know that h = 4.5 and m = 0.43.

So 5.4*0.43*4.5 = 10.4J

Planet y:

If the gravitational field strength for planet y is 3.6N/kg, g = 3.6.
and h = 6, and of course the ball still has a mass of 0.43kg.

So 3.6*.43*6 = 9.3J

So the ball on planet x had a higher gravitational potential energy.

Sorry for the short post but there's not many examples I can give of this equation without boring you to death. There's only so much of kicking a football or books on a bookshelf someone can take. But I hope you got the jist of that equation - and I'll focus on another tomorrow. Thanks for reading, Chris.

Dark Flow.

One of the weirdest phenomenon's in our universe.


Is there more out there?


Are we alone?


Can we ever know?


Dark Flow is an observation that shows us all galaxies (or most) are moving toward one region of space, year after year galaxies are being pulled toward one part of the CMBR (cosmic microwave background radiation).


Dark Flow suggests that we are not alone, i'm not just talking about in our own universe either.


The Multiverse.


Our universe is filled with billions of galaxies, right? Well a multiverse is filled with billions of universes, well we think it is anyway. And, no, its not a mess up; a fluke. "With data on more than 1,000 galaxy clusters, including some as distant as 3 billion light-years from Earth, the measurements show the universe's steady flow is clearly not a statistical fluke, Kashlinsky said."


The whole of our universe is being pulled to region of space, shifted light years across - to exert this amount of gravity you need something big, it has to be another universe, we are not alone. 


However, dark flow is very controversial, people are constantly trying to disprove it, no has become successful at this but a few have 'dented' at the theory.


Many people believe our universe is infinite, I don't, but my opinion shouldn't matter - you should have your own. I believe we live in a finite 12 sided universe, a dodecahedron. If dark flow is proven then we have much more evidence toward string theory, a finite universe and the best past...


A multiverse.


Take time to think about it, our universe, a huge object being pulled to one 'corner' of the universe, something huge must be tugging on it, bigger than it by far, like a car pulling a remote controlled car. We're being manipulated and shifted, could it be something else? Another universe? 


Dark flow is the ominous drift of our universe to one region of space at very high speeds.


Thanks for reading, Ben.

Kinematic Equation Problem Solving

Kinematic Equation Problem Solving
Today I'm going to present a problem which can be solved by using a kinematic equation and explain how it is done:

A penny is dropped down a wishing well and the time taken before it hits the water is 4.5 seconds. Find the distance between the top of the well and the water's surface.

To solve this problem we need to use the equation:

   where d is displacement (or in this case the distance) - the distance the penny travels from a to b or the distance displaced,
Vi is initial velocity,
t is time,
and a is acceleration.

Seen as we do not need to rearrange the equation in this example we can go ahead and put the values in.

The problem only gives us 1 value and we have to infer the rest, this is the time (4.5 seconds).
We also can tell that the initial velocity is 0m/s as we can assume that  the penny accelerates from rest.
Now for the acceleration - which is a little tricky ...

This value, simply put, is determined from acceleration due to gravity as the penny is falling - and since Earth's standard gravity is 9.8g, the acceleration of the penny is -9.8m/s^2. (the value is negative because of the direction of the penny - the penny is falling).

Now we have the values:

t = 4.5s

Vi = 0m/s
and a = -9.8m/s^2.

So 0m/s*4.5s+0.5*(-9.8m/s^2)*(4.5s)^2 can be worked out as -99.225m.

The value is negative in this case because the penny has 'displaced' the 99.225m in a downward motion and therefore the depth of the well (from the top to the surface of the water) is 99.2m.

Lets look at another example of this equation:

If a cheetah accelerates up to 27m/s in 3 seconds what is the acceleration of the cheetah and what is the distance it travelled in that time?

Again, to solve this problem the same equation is used without rearranging.

This time we are given two values but have two things to work out.

We're given the Vf (final velocity) this time which is 27m/s and we can also say again that the cheetah accelerated from rest so the Vi is once again 0m/s.
We're also given the time taken which is 4.5.

Using these two values we can work out the acceleration using the equation:

By using this we can work out that the cheetah accelerates at 9m/s^2.

Now we have all the values needed to work out the distance so:

Vi = 0m/s,
t = 3s,

and a = 9m/s^2.

So now we just need to put the values into the equation:

0m/s*3s+0.5(9m/s^2)(3s)^2 = 40.5m.

The displacement - or distance travelled by the cheetah - is 40.5 meters and the acceleration of the cheetah is 27m/s^2.

Thanks for reading, Chris.

Supersymmetry (SUSY).

A portion of physics wich has no direct evidence, yet still may exist.

It relates elementary particles of one spin to others of a half a spin difference. These are generally called their 'superpartners'.

SUSY exists as it helps solve lots of theoretical equations and helps a lot in string theory. Even though it is part of all most every 'theory' of string theory - string theory is not required for SUSY's existence. It could exist completely on its own, if proven that is.

Generally in our main SUSY theory, particles have giant 'shadow' particles.

I take it you know the standard model, yes?

A quark in SUSY is called a squark, alongside the normal quark too.

We have not detected any SUSY particles at all, but at the LHC they are doing experiments to try and prove the existence of the elusive particles.

Here is an imagine of the SUSY particles that I found online.

There isn't much to say on SUSY particles, unless you want some nasty math to accompany it. If SUSY is proven then we could be closer to proving one of the most developed and respected theories of this generation, String Theory. SUSY particles aren't really that important to most people, physicists will know and value their existence but to normal people like you, you don't need to worry. I just thought i'd inform you of them.

Thanks for reading, Ben.

Concept to think on (1).

"I never think of the future - it comes soon enough." - Albert Einstein

This isn't really a blog post, just something that was on my mind and since I didn't post last night (due to my Mac's trackpad being stuck, i'm using an external mouse now) I though i'd write this.


Like I mentioned, it's not really a blog post; a diary entry if anything.


Im a thinker, I dont know if this is an advantage toward my intellectual capabilities or a burden I have to carry, everywhere I go. I over think everything, and doubt myself - constantly. 


I dont just over think the cliche things though, being an aspiring physicist I over think everything to do with equations. Even when I shouldn't, I know E=mc^2 but I still question part of it, why c^2? Why not just c? They've been proven yet I will still question.


But that isn't what this is about, I want to talk about the future - should we expect the best, or worst?


Expecting the worst is probably the best thing the do, in my opinion. Then if you do get a good opportunity you will take it, and cherish it. But why should we expect the worst? We should expect the best in ourselves, aim for the clouds. As my school motto says "Soar to the heights".


Its like me, I always try to only look at the best possible outcomes with my life. I have it basically planned, but who says it'll go according to plan? 


Who says I wont die tomorrow?


Who is to say 2012 wont happen?


We take life for granted, most of us don't deserve life.


The future is a scary thing, waiting to happen. But like I said in my "Time" post - the future never really comes, the definition of future is "the time or a period of time following the moment of speaking or writing; time regarded as still to come." So if you talk about the very near future, it is present at that time. But then present doesn't exist, as we do not see in the present, we see in the past. But past doesn't exist either, it has happened but is not happening [generally] now. So really, we just live. No past, present or future.


I know what I want to do with my life. 


Others don't.


It is this that shakes the foundations of what I want to do. If I want to go to University, someone who is unsure of their own future could put mine on a detour and crumble my dreams of becoming a physicist.


I'm 15, i'm nearly at a stage in my life where I will have to work. I want to go to college, university, and then back to university for a Ph.D - this will take about 10 year.


3652 days [approx]. 


Thats 3652 that have to go to plan, who says they will - who says yours will? No one's life is certain to happen the way they'd like. To be honest, its more likely to go the other way. The Earth is a big place, it is home to 7 billion people, many will want to do the same things as you.


What makes you different to them?


Thanks for reading, Ben.

Solving equations in everyday situations. (1)

Today I'm going to be talking about solving physics-type equations based on real life situations - this one being a dog out for a walk. To solve this puzzle a knowledge of only two equationss are needed: Velocity and Kinetic Energy.

We are given three pieces of information in this problem:

- The weight of the dog: 20kg
-The distance walked: 1km
-and the time taken: 20 minutes.

Firstly we need to calculate the dogs velocity using this equation:

This means: velocity = change in distance/ time taken.

The initial distance was 0 as the dog started from nothing and the final distance was 1km and the time taken was 20 minutes or 1200 seconds so the dogs velocity is: 0.83 m/s.

Now that we have the velocity we can calculate the dogs kinetic energy using this equation:

We know the mass which is 20kg and the velocity which is 0.83 m/s. So we need to do 1/2(20(0.83*0.83)) which is 6.89J of Kinetic energy.

So there a seemingly daunting problem solved with the use of only two equations.

This is only a short post but since I'm doing another 'mini series' on equations these posts won't be too long - thanks for reading, Chris.

The Higgs Boson.

" Not only is the truth stranger than we can understand, it is stranger then we are capable of understanding." - Unknown

The Higgs Boson, possibly the most important particle and dubbed the 'God Particle' - even though this saying came from a book - "The God Particle: If The Universe Is The Answer, What Is The Question?". According to most people, the author wanted to call it the 'Goddamn' particle because it is so hard to find.

The ironic part about calling it the 'God particle' is that it has nothing at all to do with religion, well it had a part in creating the universe as we know it.

Even though we think we have found it (apparently with 5sigma precession, which is about 1/1,000,000 chance of being a 'fluke') it is still classed as hypothetic, until is it actually found, and proven. 

The Higgs Boson, many people expect its name to be Latin, or Greek, its actually just the man who discovered/predicted it's second name. Peter Higgs.

Finding the Higgs has proven difficult. We can never observe it directly, but we know/predict what it will decay into. So we smash protons together at 99.9% of c and observe the collision, we look for the trail of particles it should leave behind and try ad find it from there.

The hardest part about finding the Higgs is that the standard model (see previous posts) doesn't predict its mass, so we basically have to guess where it could be. 

The Higgs allows particles to what you could say gain mass. The Higgs field is a medium of Higgs'. But how does it act? I'm going to use one of Brain Cox's analogies for this explanation.

Imagine a room full of people (these are the Higgs Bosons, the floor is the Higgs medium), and someone who is very 'unpopular' walks in, the room will split in two, and everyone will avoid this person, right?

This is what a Higgs does to massless particles such as a photon etc.

But... If someone very popular walks in, people will crowd round, as they like him. And he will gain mass, due to these Higgs'. This is why we have mass in a very basic analogy.

The Higgs is on of the most important particles in the TOE (theory of everything) and if we find it, we will learn so much about the universe. Why photons are massless, why we have mass, why the forces (electromagnetic, strong, weak, gravity) act like the do and we will have a better understanding of the early universe. How quarks were made, how protons were formed, then nuclei and now, well... us.

Thanks for reading, Ben.