Then they said, on their second attempt, they declared they found it and were analyzing the results’.
Particle tracks from a proton-proton collision (also called an event) in the ATLAS experiment at CERN’s Large Hadron Collider (LHC). Events like this are a possible sign of the Higgs particle, though many events must be analyzed together to say with confidence the signal came from the elusive particle.LHC’s CMS Shows Possible Higgs SignatureCredit: CERN/CMS/Taylor, L; McCauley, T Real CMS proton-proton collisions events at the Large Hadron Collider in which 4 high energy electrons (red towers) are observed. The event shows characteristics expected from the decay of a Higgs boson but is also consistent with background Standard Model physics processes.
Now comes a profound Statement .
”
A subatomic particle discovered last year that may be the long-sought Higgs boson might doom our universe to an unfortunate end, researchers say.
The mass of the particle, which was uncovered at the world’s largest particle accelerator — the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) in Geneva — is a key ingredient in a calculation that portends the future of space and time.
‘Many tens of billions of years from now there’ll be a catastrophe.’
“This calculation tells you that many tens of billions of years from now there’ll be a catastrophe,” Joseph Lykken, a theoretical physicist at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory in Batavia, Ill., said Monday, Feb. 18, at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.”
“Copyright 2013 LiveScience, a TechMediaNetwork company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.”
The amazing discovery is that the Universe is Unstable and it May end Billions of years from hence.
But, the great Scientist consoles us ‘
”
But even if the universe is in for an unfortunate end, there is at least one reason for consolation.
“You won’t actually see it, because it will come at you at the speed of light,” Lykken said. “So in that sense don’t worry.”‘
What a Profound discovery.
Even a child knows the universe or even we will become extinct one day and we may not be able to do any thing about it.
PRO: According to our understanding of the universe, the matter we can observe only accounts for about 4 percent of all the matter that exists. Physicists have proposed a kind of substance called dark matter that might make up to 25 percent of the matter in the universe when combined with what we can see. The other 75 percent might come from dark energy. Some scientists at CERN hope the LHC will uncover evidence of dark matter.
CON: The LHC could also produce black holes. A black hole compresses matter into a point of infinite density called a singularity. In general, most people think compressing matter like that constitutes a bad thing — some worry the black holes generated by CERN could destroy the Earth. CERN scientists say that if the LHC does create black holes, they will be very small, harmless and will decay almost instantaneously.
Psychoanalysts believe that the child hood determines the character of the individual.
Looking Sexy- Is this?
Sigmund Freud shifts the blame for any Abnormal behavior to parents.
Now instead leaving dismissing things which are of trivial nature, some people try to find reasons for even these rare instances and at times the ridiculous!
One such is the Reason for a s girl child trying to look sexy.
To the best of my knowledge and experience this is a load of rubbish.
Children behave the way the parents do without knowing why and what they do.
Look at the image above.the child does not seem to be conscious of what it is doing.
Finding out reasons for these…..?
These chaps have to earn Living!
Almost a third of girls’ clothing for sale at 15 major retailers has sexualizing characteristics, a new study finds, a trend that psychologists say can encourage girls to view themselves as sex objects at an early age.
The majority of sexualized clothes also had childlike characteristics, such as polka dots, the research found. Nonetheless, adults in the study rated these childish butsexualizing clothes as just as sexy as clothes with only sexualizing features.
“Even though parents might see them as more acceptable [than purely sexy clothes], I’m not sure they’re perceived that differently,” study researcher Sarah Murnen, a social psychologist at Kenyon College in Ohio, said of the clothes that mixed sexuality and girlishness.
The sexy-clothes trend
Handwringing over the sexualization of young girls is a common theme both in the media and in the mall. In 2007, Wal-Mart pulled a pair of girls’ underwear with the words “Who needs credit cards … ” on the front and “when you have Santa” on the back from the shelves after parental outcry. Those extreme cases get people’s ire up, said Sharon Lamb, a professor of mental health at the University of Massachusetts in Boston who was not involved in the research. But the trend is more insidious than single cases make it out to be, Lamb told LiveScience. [10 Surprising Sex Statistics]
“It’s not just this most outrageous thing,” said Lamb, author of “Packaging Girlhood: Rescuing Our Daughters From Marketer’s Schemes” (St. Martin’s Press, 2006). “It’s a lot of subtle little things, too.”
In 2007, Lamb was part of an American Psychological Association Task Force that reviewed the research on the consequences of sexualization for young girls. The task force found that girls who buy into sexualizing media messages are more likely to experience low self-esteem, depression and eating disorders. One 1998 study found that girls made body-conscious by wearing swimsuits while they did a math test in an empty room did worse on the test than girls completing the same test while wearing sweaters. There were no differences in test-taking performance between boys wearing swimsuits and boys wearing sweaters, suggesting a link between self-objectification and shame and anxiety in girls.
I have often heard of people seeing Sound, especially when they are engrossed in Listening to Music.
Other case relate to other circumstances.
Why do some people see sounds?
Story:
Seeing Sound.
Past experiments revealed there are strong differences between individuals when it comes to how prone they are to this illusion. “Some would experience it almost every time a flash was accompanied by two bleeps, others would almost never see the second flash,” said researcher Benjamin de Haas, a neuroscientist at University College London.
On average, the volunteers saw the illusion 62 percent of the time, although some saw it only 2 percent of the time while others saw it 100 percent of the time. They found the smaller a person’s visual cortex was — the part of the brain linked with vision —the more likely he or she experienced the illusion.
“If we both look at the same thing, we would expect our perception to be identical,” de Haas told LiveScience. “Our results demonstrate that this not quite true in every situation — sometimes what you perceive depends on your individual brain anatomy.”
The researchers suggest this illusion could reveal a way the brain compensates for imperfect visual circuitry.
“The visual brain’s representation of what hits the eye is very efficient but not perfect — there is some uncertainty to visual representations, especially when things happen quickly, like the rapid succession of flashes in the illusion,” de Haas said. “We speculate that this kind of uncertainty is bigger in brains that dedicate a smaller proportion of neurons to visual areas, just like a camera with fewer megapixels will give you a lower image quality.”
“If this speculation holds, it would make perfect sense for smaller visual brains to make more use of the additional information provided by the ears,” de Haas explained. “In the real world, sources of light and sound are often identical, and combining them will be advantageous. Imagine you take a twilight walk in a forest and scare up some animal in the undergrowth. The best strategy for finding out whether you are dealing with a hedgehog or a bear will involve combining visual information, like moving twigs and branches, with auditory information, like cracking wood.”
Much remains unknown about the roots of this illusion. For instance, only about a quarter of the individual differences regarding the illusion could be explained by brain anatomy. “We still haven’t explained the rest,” de Haas said.
Future research can also explore “whether the relationship between visual cortex size and audiovisual perception is specific to this illusion or holds for other audiovisual illusions as well,” de Haas said.
There are two schools of thought on the subject of ‘waning interest of Women in Sex’.
One states that women and men lose interest as Passionate Sex is replaced by Compassion Sex.
The other school argues that ‘remain perpetually high in order for them to produce many offspring, while female desire should decrease as their attention turns, historically, toward child-rearing.’
These studies seem to assume that the interest of Men and Women decrease in general and more so in a long term relationship.
Men do not lose interest in Sex but it is true that they lose interest with the same partner or in a long-term relationship.
But women do not admit their interest in Sex remain undiminished save in the circumstances applicable to men.
However, the interest of Both males and Females remain intact or even heightened in new relationships.
The reason is that in Sex mystery and the thrill of exploration heightens the interest.
This is missing in a long Relationship as the thrill, excitement and a sense of exploration is gone.
This is because in a long-term relationship things are taken for granted.
Sex is interesting so long as it is wrapped in mystery and remains seemingly difficult to achieve.
Women , at least in India, tend to neglect this, pay scant attention to their physical attributes and cease to be interesting to men.
In the case of women ,they do get the feeling of being tired and get excited by the prospect of uncharted territory.
The females while taking care of the child, is also interested in producing more offspring in different combinations.
This also applies to Males.
This may sound shocking to some.
But one should not forget that we are animals by definition and Mother Nature wants to propagate Species.
Sexual Health and interest in Sex will be good if one were to treat it as one treat Hunger/ Thirst, as basic instincts.
Only when you attribute values to them it becomes complicated.
Sex in neither sacred nor is it a Sin.
Take it as it is as one would, avoiding what is bad as one would in Food.
Story:
New research is demonstrating what many people already knew from experience: Women lose interest in sex over time, while men don’t.
The finding has the potential to help couples, the researchers said. Knowing that many women’s sexual desire diminishes over the course of a relationship could encourage both partners to be more realistic about their sex lives, and could help them weather the changes in desire as they occur.
Sex researchers Sarah Murray and Robin Milhausen, both of the University of Guelph in Ontario, Canada, asked 170 undergraduate women and men who had been in heterosexual relationships for anywhere from one month to nine years to report on their levels of relationship satisfaction, sexual satisfaction and sexual desire. Desire was scored using an established model called the Female Sexual Function Index, which ranges from 1.2 to 6.0.
The participants reported being generally satisfied with their relationships and sex lives, but women reported lower levels of desire depending on the length of their relationship. “Specifically, for each additional month women in this study were in a relationship with their partner, their sexual desire decreased by 0.02 on the Female Sexual Function Index,” the authors wrote online Jan. 23 in the Journal of Sex & Marital Therapy.
In fact, relationship duration was a better predictor of sexual desire in women than both relationship and sexual satisfaction. While the 0.02 decrease in female desire was small, it contrasts with male desire, which held steady over time, the researchers said. [6 Scientific Tips for a Happy Relationship]
Evolution of desire
Scientists have disagreed on what happens to desire over the course of a relationship. “Some researchers suggest that both men’s and women’s desire would decrease over time as relationships move from passionate love to compassionate love,” said Murray, the lead study author and a doctoral candidate in human sexuality.
Yet evolutionary theorists predict that male desire should remain perpetually high in order for them to produce many offspring, while female desire should decrease as their attention turns, historically, toward child-rearing.
The new research points toward the latter theory, although longer-duration studies on different groups of people are still needed, Murray said.
Men consistently report higher levels of sexual desire than women. Differences in levels of hormones — testosterone, specifically — are believed to at least partially explain the gender divide.
Hormonal changes that occur as couples move from the passionate early stage to the compassionate later stage into monogamous relationships sometime between six and 30 months may also mediate changes in desire over time. Pharmaceutical companies are currently researching the impact of testosterone on women’s desire, but so far, the results have been inconclusive.
Hormones are only part of the story, Murray told LiveScience. “Although they are one piece of the sexual desire puzzle, focusing too heavily on hormones can remove the contextual factors that play into desire, such as whether or not a woman is in a satisfying, loving relationship, and if she has time to feel relaxed, playful and sexy,” she said.
Keeping the spark alive
The results could help researchers understand why women who seek sex therapy complain of low desire more than any other problem. Differences in levels of desire within couples, known as desire discrepancy, is a growing area of interest for therapists.
“The concept of an absolute level of ‘normal’ or ‘low’ sexual desire is being replaced by the view that low sexual desire is relative to one’s partner’s level of desire,” Murray said. But although desire discrepancy is known to negatively affect overall sexual and relationship satisfaction, very little else is understood about it, such as whether it contributes significantly to infidelity or breakups.
The new research could also help couples manage their relationships over time. In an earlier study, Murray found that women who reported more realistic expectations about what sex would be like in a long-term relationship also had higher levels of desire than those with less realistic expectations. “I think that individuals who expect to maintain the high level of excitement and passion that often exists in the first few months of a new relationship are setting up unrealistic expectations about what is to come and will be more disappointed when the desire and passion take on different forms,” she said.
A View of Earth from Saturn (Photo credit: alpoma)
Gravity may be pretty consistent on Earth, but our perception of it isn’t. According to research published in April 2011 in the journal PLoS ONE, people are better at judging how objects fall when they’re sitting upright versus lying on their sides.
The finding means that our perception of gravity may be less based on visual cues of gravity’s real direction and more rooted in the orientation of the body. The findings may lead to new strategies to help astronauts deal with microgravity in space.(Please read my bog on TIME-a non linear Theory)
Speaking of astronauts, their experience has shown that a switch to weightlessness and back can be tough on the body. In the absence of gravity, muscles atrophy and bones likewise lose bone mass. According to NASA, astronauts can lose 1 percent of their bone mass per month in space.
When astronauts come back to Earth, their bodies and minds need time to recover. Blood pressure, which has equalized throughout the body in space, has to return to an Earthly pattern in which the heart must work hard to keep the brain nourished with blood. Occasionally, astronauts struggle with that adjustment. In 2006, astronautHeidemarie Stefanyshyn-Piper collapsed at a welcome-home ceremony the day after returning from a Space Shuttle mission to the International Space Station.
The mental readjustment can be just as tricky. In 1973, Skylab 2 astronaut Jack Lousma told Time magazine that he’d accidentally smashed a bottle of aftershave in his first days back from a month-long sojourn in space. He’d let go of the bottle in mid-air, forgetting that it would crash to the ground rather than just float there.
Pluto may no longer be a planet, but it’s still a good bet for lightening up. A 150-pound (68 kilogram) person would weigh no more than 10 pounds (4.5 kg) on the dwarf planet. The planet with the most crushing gravity, on the other hand, is Jupiter, where the same person would weigh more than 354 pounds (160.5 kg).
The planet humans are most likely to visit, Mars, would also leave explorers feeling light-footed. Mars’ gravitational pull is only 38 percent that of Earth’s, meaning a 150-pound person would feel like they weigh about 57 pounds (26 kg).
Even on Earth, gravity isn’t entirely even. Because the globe isn’t a perfect sphere, its mass is distributed unevenly. And uneven mass means slightly uneven gravity.
One mysterious gravitational anomaly is in the Hudson Bay of Canada (shown above). This area has lower gravity than other regions, and a 2007 study finds that now-melted glaciers are to blame.
The ice that once cloaked the area during the last ice age has long since melted, but the Earth hasn’t entirely snapped back from the burden. Since gravity over an area is proportional to the mass atop that region, and the glacier’s imprint pushed aside some of the Earth’s mass, gravity is a bit less strong in the ice sheet’s imprint. The slight deformation of the crust explains 25 percent to 45 percent of the unusually low gravity; the rest may be explained by a downward drag caused the motion of magma in Earth’s mantle (the layer just beneath the crust), researchers reported in the journal Science.
Bad news for space cadets: Some bacteria become nastier in space. A 2007 study published in the journal Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences found that salmonella, the bacteria that commonly causes food poisoning, becomes three times more virulent in microgravity. Something about the lack of gravity changed the activity of at least 167 salmonella genes and 73 of its proteins. Mice fed the gravity-free salmonella got sick faster after consuming less of the bacteria.
In other words, Michael Crichton‘s “The Andromeda Strain” had it wrong: The danger of infection in space may not come from space bugs. It’s more likely our own bugs grown stronger would strike us.
Named because nothing, not even light, can escape their gravitational clutches, black holes are some of the most destructive objects in the universe. At the center of our galaxy is a massive black hole with the mass of 3 million suns. Scarier thought? It might be “just resting,” according Kyoto University scientist Tatsuya Inui.
The black hole isn’t really a danger to us Earthlings — it’s both far away and it’s remarkably calm. But sometimes it does put on a show: Inui and colleagues reported in 2008 that the black hole sent out a flare of energy 300 years ago. Another study, released in 2007, found that several thousand years ago, a galactic hiccup sent a small amount of matter the size of Mercury falling into the black hole, leading to another outburst.
The black hole, named Sagittarius A*, is dim compared with other black holes.
“This faintness implies that stars and gas rarely get close enough to the black hole to be in any danger,” Frederick Baganoff, a researcher at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology who was involved with the 2007 study, told LiveScience‘s sister site SPACE.com. “The huge appetite is there, but it’s not being satisfied.”
A NASA probe orbiting Earth has confirmed two key predictions of Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity, which describes how gravity causes masses to warp space-time around them.
The Gravity Probe B mission was launched in 2004 to study two aspects of Einstein’s theory about gravity: the geodetic effect, or the warping of space and time around a gravitational body; and frame-dragging, which describes the amount of space and time a spinning objects pulls with it as it rotates.
“Imagine the earth as if it were immersed in honey,” Stanford University physicist Francis Everitt, Gravity Probe B’s principal investigator, said in a statement. “As the planet rotates, the honey around it would swirl, and it’s the same with space and time. GP-B confirmed two of the most profound predictions of Einstein’s universe, having far-reaching implications across astrophysics research.” [6 Weird Facts About Gravity]
Gravity Probe B used four ultra-precise gyroscopes to measure the two gravitational hypotheses. The probe confirmed both effects with unprecedented precision by pointing its instruments at a single star called IM Pegasi.
, a TechMediaNetwork company. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.”
You must be logged in to post a comment.