Two things to link: The frenzy about findings and non-findings at the LHC pose a good reason to think about the possible implications. Therefore, an article by R.Geroch on the consistency of faster than light signals (e.g. neutrinos measured at the LHC) and special relativity (for example, due to partially breaking Lorentz invariance for neutrinos, but not all the other particles). There is also a blog post on FTL-neutrinos.
Moreover there is a bunch of popular science articles by A.Ashtekar (who is one of the founders of loop quantum gravity).
Posts mit dem Label quantum mechanics werden angezeigt. Alle Posts anzeigen
Posts mit dem Label quantum mechanics werden angezeigt. Alle Posts anzeigen
Dienstag, 13. Dezember 2011
Samstag, 28. März 2009
Stanford University lectures
I (was) stumbled over the stanford university youtube channel, containing a quite large collection of video-taped lectures:
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=stanforduniversity&view=playlists
The modern physics series seems to be ok, if you don't exspect abstract math concepts explained in detail but are ok with the that's-all-we-need kind of math (or know the concepts anyways). Watch the first 10 minutes of the quantum mechanics part if you want some explaination of the purpose of lecture series.
The chemical engineering lectures seem to be stupid. I suppose they're quite self-contained in regard of the missing slides if you only have the videos, but seriously, I strongly dislike the professor and his attitude. And I so would have failed his class for he over-emphazises excercises so extremly..ridiculous :>
Nothing to tell about the rest of the lectures, maybe some point later.
Some small addition to the philosphy of science post: Popper wrote quite some chapters about probability and theories based on that. He disregared this notion for being only meta-physical, not scientific. As for my understanding, he says you need to find some way of falsification of a theory to get it out of the meta-physical trap.
http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=stanforduniversity&view=playlists
The modern physics series seems to be ok, if you don't exspect abstract math concepts explained in detail but are ok with the that's-all-we-need kind of math (or know the concepts anyways). Watch the first 10 minutes of the quantum mechanics part if you want some explaination of the purpose of lecture series.
The chemical engineering lectures seem to be stupid. I suppose they're quite self-contained in regard of the missing slides if you only have the videos, but seriously, I strongly dislike the professor and his attitude. And I so would have failed his class for he over-emphazises excercises so extremly..ridiculous :>
Nothing to tell about the rest of the lectures, maybe some point later.
Some small addition to the philosphy of science post: Popper wrote quite some chapters about probability and theories based on that. He disregared this notion for being only meta-physical, not scientific. As for my understanding, he says you need to find some way of falsification of a theory to get it out of the meta-physical trap.
Abonnieren
Posts (Atom)