Over on Quantum Diaries, Dr. Caolionn O’Connell (who has outdone most physicists by not only having a paper in PRL=Physical Review Letters, but having a PRL cover!*) has added to her explanation of what her work on Plasma Wake Field Acceleration is all about, and shows some slides from her paper and thesis presentation. (She’s now a PhD and has come (back) to Southern California to start as a postdoc at Caltech.)
It is the third part of a series of explanations, and you should read parts one and two first.
Plasma Wake Field Acceleration – which has the charged particles being accelerated sort of “surfing” on an electromagnetic wave – may well be the science upon which future particle physics accelerators depend, so keep your eye on Caolionn’s work, as we might not get to test string theory (or whatever lies well beyond the Standard Model) without her help.
-cvj
*In the interests of full disclosure: I don’t even have a PRL, much less a diagram of my own on the cover. As you might guess from the length of most of my posts on this blog, it’ll probably not happen any time soon because I can never be brief enough to fit a paper within the required four pages….
August 18th, 2005 at 8:52 pm
Hah. I got a *Nature* cover.
But, to be honest, it was a total scam. Other people did the work and I just helped with the computer graphics. If you want a cover, people, computer graphics is where it’s at.
August 19th, 2005 at 11:09 am
This is off topic (somewhat) but I’m curious as to the Variance’s opinion on a couple of things. First, have you heard what the physics communities response has been to Stephen Hawking’s latest pre-print regarding black holes? As a non-physicist it’s hard for me to judge the validity of his piece. Second, what are the general merits (or lack thereof) of loop quantum gravity? How does it differ from string theory? Thanks, love your site.
August 19th, 2005 at 11:25 am
Hi,
Yes, very off-topic.
I’m unable to reply in an depth now, but I think that there was a discussion of it on Peter Woit’s blog not so long ago. Have a look through there. He’ll also maybe have links from there to other discussions that I do not know of.
-cvj
August 19th, 2005 at 11:51 am
Hi Cameron,
Clifford is kind to send you my way for information about LQG, but it’s not something I’m that knowledgeable about or have written about other than tangentially on my blog. Lee Smolin has written in there with some extensive comments on LQG, and last year there was an interesting exchange between him and Larry Yaffe on the subject. For something non-technical I’d suggest looking at Lee’s book “Three Roads to Quantum Gravity”, for something more technical, both he and Carlo Rovelli have written a lot of expository material, which shouldn’t be too hard for you to find.
August 19th, 2005 at 3:25 pm
Congratulations to Dr.Caolionn O’Connell! This must be truly gratifying after all those years of hard work.
August 19th, 2005 at 4:20 pm
Thanks for the reciprocal plug. But none of the that string-theory pressure, we’re just hoping to be a viable technology in general at this point.
And thanks, citrine. I have to say it really does feel awesome to have finally finished.
August 19th, 2005 at 5:21 pm
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/einstein/toda-oconnell.html
Physicists need groupies too. Gnarly.
August 19th, 2005 at 9:34 pm
Peter, Cameron,
I was referring to the Hawking black hole claims, specifically. Your recommendations for reading on LQG are good ones.
-cvj