« first day (607 days earlier)      last day (4393 days later) » 

3:48 PM
Sure, start a chat session as I get ready to go to work.
Hello, @kortuk :)
@Manishearth Morning mate.
@Kortuk that's unfortunate :( Hard to find a time that works for everyone though...
@DavidZaslavsky :)
Yeah :\
@david whats the plan for today?
3:54 PM
@Manishearth I don't entirely have one, to be honest :-)
On the physics side, we could talk about the Higgs boson, that's what everyone else is doing
Also we could try to get some tag cleanup done
@DavidZaslavsky Ugh. At least EE is not the only site.
<---is clueless about recent events regarding the HB
@Kortuk yeah... it's unpleasant but necessary
@Manishearth Ah, well then... the tl;dr is that the LHC experiments are expected to announce that they have probably discovered the Higgs tomorrow
@DavidZaslavsky that is what I heard. I am excited.
Hmm. One of my friends has a parent at CERN
I can ask him if he knows anything :)
3:59 PM
@Manishearth Yeah, his parents probably dont :)
To be more precise, word is that they have found a resonance at 125 GeV, with a 5σ significance when the data from both ATLAS and CMS are combined. But they're not sure that it is in fact the standard model Higgs boson.
Hi @Argus
The Tevatron experiments announced yesterday that they had evidence of the same resonance at 125 GeV with a significance of 2.9σ
@kortuk well, his mother does work on the higgs thingy.
Hmm, interesting
If nothing else, the official results are supposed to be kept under wraps until the announcement at ICHEP, so even if your friend's mother knows the results, she's not supposed to tell you
Yep, I can guess that :p
Could someone give me a short nudge to what it means that they have finnaly discovered the Higgs particle?
4:06 PM
You might want to take a look at profmattstrassler.com , that's one of my preferred sources for news about the Higgs boson and other particle physics stuff
@N3buchadnezzar Are you curious about the implications of discovering the Higgs boson, or how they would know they have discovered it?
More the former =)
@N3buchadnezzar As far as I know, not that much. It would basically confirm something that particle physicists have expected for a long time, and then the standard model would be complete (in the sense that there are no remaining undiscovered predicted particles). But it's not going to inspire any particularly new physics that hasn't already been done.
Which is sort of unfortunate, because everyone has been hoping the LHC would find something that would inspire some new physics.
Is string theory still a nebulous blob then?
4:14 PM
At least, no experimental confirmation for that yet. But that's kind of unrelated to the Higgs boson.
Higgs bosoms
Yeah, it was sparked off from your "new physics" comment
People were also hoping the LHC would discover supersymmetric partner particles, but that didn't happen
by "nebulous", I meant "hundreds of various branches". Of course it hasnt been experimentally verified yet :p
Hmm, that would be new physics
I mean, supersymmetry has been explored, but IIRC not much
@Manishearth Oh, well... yeah, that's probably a fair assessment.
@Manishearth Theoretically, people have done a lot of work with it. But experimentally, no, not much.
4:18 PM
@ColinMcFaul @RoryAlsop hi, I see you lurking :-)
Yeah, I'm lurking. I don't have anything interesting to say about the Higgs, the LHC, SUSY, or string theory.
sure :-)
I do also want to talk about tag cleanup
at some point
@ColinMcFaul I doubt anyone has anything interesting to say about string theory BAZINGA.
@colinM More of a chemistry guy, hmm?
4:21 PM
lol ;-)
As in something that could actually be proven.
@N3buchadnezzar HA!
I'm actually involved in a discussion about this on Reddit at the moment
@Manishearth, my research is most chemistry these days, but my formal education is all physics.
@ColinMcFaul oh cool, that sounds like an interesting crossover
4:24 PM
@colin hmm, you're an exEP student? College starts in a month, I'm taking EP as well :)
So between the two, I feel most comfortable answering questions about core physics classes and some low-level chemistry.
Hi @lurscher
My department is called Physics and Engineering Physics, but the EngPh part of it is still being built
a couple of my classes were cross-listed, but I don't feel that I knwo enough engineering to call myself an engineer
4:27 PM
What is the difference, anyway? Is EngPh like what other people call applied physics?
we've run one or two classes of undergrads through the engPh curricululm, but we're only now about to get our first actual engineering grad student
@DavidZaslavsky, that's probably what i personally would call it :)
@david apparently we have nanotech and semiconductor stuff in our 4th year
Aside from that, most of our courses are pure physics
one difference that i know of is that the EngPh program has to go through an engineering accredidation
the only other difference I think i notice is a larger emphsis on the design of instrumentation.
@Manishearth Makes sense
4:30 PM
but i don't know, i might bve making that up
@colin so what are you researching?
stimuli-responsive polymers
Looks interesting :)
and what different ways I can abuse them to change the stimuli-responsiveness
it is interesting.
it's hard, too, because i'm playing catch-up on the chemistry
Am I correct in assuming that this will help us understand the crazy behaviour of enzymes?
4:34 PM
i guess some polymer physicists don't do their own chemistry, but we insist on doing most of our own chemistry.
yeah, that's one of the hopes
the idea is that it's the same process as protein folding and unfolding
Yeah, I figured
but proteins are a lot harder than synthetic polymers ):
Gotta start small I suppose
4:36 PM
Of course :)
So, a Physics student, doing research in chemistry, which finally has applications in biology.
Science is awesome
True dat ;-P
exactly. i love the interdisciplinary part of it.
Honestly, I'm a little jealous... my own research has basically no applications at all
I think you'd told me what it was. Refresh me? :)
Oh, my research? I basically work on analyzing solutions to an equation which governs part of the structure of the proton
A: How the nucleon structure has been identified experimentally?

David ZaslavskyAs you may know, when particles are scattered off a target, what actually gets measured is the differential cross section $\frac{\mathrm{d}\sigma}{\mathrm{d}\Omega}$. This can basically be thought of as being related to the fraction of particles that come out of the collision in a particular dire...

Like that sort of stuff, generally speaking
4:45 PM
Ooh, nice
Wait.. I thought parton!=quark
Quarks are one type of parton
Unless you're Gell-Mann
Well, actually they're several types of parton...
"partons" = quarks + gluons
in a set theory sense
OK, well, before this chat session ends, there are a couple of site-related things I wanted to talk about (maybe in the future we'll do these at the beginning)
4:49 PM
Yep :)
First, there was some talk about adding the word "Astronomy" to the site logo. I haven't really thought about that for a while, but I just wanted to see what people's current thoughts are on that matter.
Don't think it matters if it ends.. Whoevers around will probably stay around
@Manishearth hm, probably true
Something like a subtext (& astronomy)?
Yeah, that's what I'm thinking
Q: Change name to Physics&Astronomy?

Manishearth Related: If it's possible, do we want to expand the scope of this site to include astronomy? Related chat : http://chat.stackexchange.com/rooms/71/conversation/site-merging-chat-event It seems that we have decided to take all Astro questions, including observational astro (though we...

the relevant meta question, if anyone is curious
4:52 PM
Another possibility, to keep the Physics part of the logo like it is, but add in smaller text '& Astronomy' under. — Holowitz May 17 at 6:41
hello :)
My thoughts about the renaming have changed since that post, now I support it
Hey there :)
OK, cool :-)
I plan on bringing this up with the team sometime soon
and I just wanted to see if people still had particular opinions about it that I should keep in mind
i like changing it at least in the logo, to make it more apparent that astro questions are considered on-topic.
Well, I mainly have the same concern as anna. Avoid highlighting astro too much
4:56 PM
physics & astronomy sounds good
@Manishearth yeah, I'll keep that in mind, but I don't think it'll be a problem.
We can probably get them to redirect astro.se to us (like seasonedadvice, etc)
Not too concermed about it either
The other thing I wanted to talk about (oy, 3 minutes!) is the tag cleanup.
This seems like an opportune time to make a push to finish retagging
Q: Tag cleanup--[light]

Manishearth Chat link, Another one I'm currently retagging all questions tagged light to visible-light and/or electromagnetic-radiation Since editing them all at once will flood the main page, I'll keep track of them here, and slowly work my way through them. Feel free to help! (try to do maximum 5 at...

4:58 PM
Ah right, keep forgetting
We have next up as well
@Manishearth me too actually ;-)
(EM radiation? Thermal radiation? Gives-you-cancer radiation?)
who knows, there's even some overlap among those
Being able to do only five at a time is annoying, though.
Yeah, but probably it's for the best
5:01 PM
Of course :)
Anyway, it's 1:00 - thanks to everyone who showed up for the chat session today and we'll be here again in 2 weeks!
Yep :)
If I get time, I'll write up the radiation post as well
@Manishearth OK, cool
I'll retag a few of those questions, starting from the bottom of the section
Do we need to keep track of it via the meta post? Or is it really no issue if we burn through the list directly?
As long as we're keeping it to 5 at a time, I think we have to keep track
5:06 PM
6:03 PM
For anyone interested: the presentation of CERN's results on the Higgs search will be shown at webcast.web.cern.ch/webcast 9AM Zurich time
6:48 PM
Hi @David I tried to coincide my lunch with the chat schedule but my phone was definately not in the mood to cooperate. I will be on at my usual time.
2 hours later…
8:43 PM
@Argus Sure, no problem
9:06 PM
did chat event end??
2 hours later…
10:49 PM
I believe it was only an hour or so long

« first day (607 days earlier)      last day (4393 days later) »