ComPhyX: 2017

Tuesday, 29 August 2017

9 Things You Shouldn’t Do on an Empty Stomach

“You are what you eat” is an adage known to everyone. But what we do before a meal also has a great impact on our health.

I am going to tell you about 9 things you can’t do on an empty stomach (no less than 2 hours after your last meal). As a bonus, you’ll find information about what you can do when you’re hungry at the end of the article.

9. Take anti-inflammatories

Aspirin, paracetamol, and other nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) can’t be taken on an empty stomach. Not only does it reduce their effectiveness but it causes serious health problems (such as gastric bleeding) as well. Read here about other medicines not to be taken on an empty stomach.

Advice: Milk lowers the negative effects of NSAIDs. If it’s not available, you can wash the drug down with plenty of water.

8. Drink coffee

Even decaffeinated coffee stimulates the production of acid that might cause heartburn and other digestive tract issues if drunk on an empty stomach. Skipping breakfast even after coffee may lead to a serotonin deficiency and a gloomy mood for the rest of the day.

Advice: If you’re unable to give up the habit of drinking coffee first thing in the morning, consume it with milk or cream: milk fat will reduce the negative effects. Choose natural coffee over freeze-dried.

7. Drink alcohol

Without eating, the alcohol absorption rate increases by a factor of 2 and is the same as during its intravenous injection. In contrast, the removal of alcohol breakdown products slows down, which provokes a severe hangover. The rapid effect of alcohol on the body doesn’t go without negative consequences for your liver, heart, and kidneys.

Advice: If the situation doesn’t allow you to refuse a drink, give preference to cooled noncarbonated drinks as they are absorbed more slowly. Better yet, eat at least a small sandwich, ideally one that contains butter.

6. Chew gum

The digestive acid produced while you’re chewing gum destroys the lining of an empty stomach; overindulgence with gum may lead to gastritis. It is also scientifically proven that people who chew gum prefer junk food (French fries, candy) rather than fruit and vegetables.

Advice: Chewing gums containing natural sweeteners (xylitol, sorbitol) are less harmful than those with sugar, cyclamate, or aspartame. Avoid chewing gum for more than 10 minutes, even on a full stomach.

5. Go to bed

Hunger and low glucose levels prevent us from falling asleep and cause superficial sleep and early awakening. Interestingly, a lack of sleep increases the level of hunger hormones. This is the reason why we eat more on the following day after skipping dinner.

Advice: Gorging yourself before sleep is also a bad idea. The best solution is dairy products because they contain magnesium and calcium. These elements will ensure a sound sleep.

4. Intense training

There is an opinion that exercising on an empty stomach burns more calories. In truth, that doesn’t influence fat loss. Muscle loss, on the other hand, is real. The exercise intensity is also reduced since the body lacks energy.

Advice: Replace intense training with aerobic exercise. If you have digestive issues, you’d better have a snack before any type of exercise because physical activity induces production of gastric juice, which is harmful to an empty stomach.

3. Shop

We all know that hunger makes us buy more food than we actually need. In fact, an empty stomach makes us more acquisitive even in non-food stores. According to research, the internal message of “I want food“ gets pared down to simply ”I want,” and the famished person obeys that message by buying things.

Advice: Besides a shopping list made in advance, paying with cash can also help you save money. Further research shows that people tend to spend less when they pay with cash instead of a credit card.

2. Drink citrus juice

The acid and tough fibers contained in citrus fruits irritate your empty stomach, which is especially dangerous for those who have gastritis or are at risk of developing it.

Advice: Freshly squeezed citrus juice will bring nothing but benefits if you dilute it with water in a 1:1 ratio (for those with hyperacidity) or 2:1 (for all others). By the way, there are other foods besides citruses that shouldn’t be eaten on an empty stomach. You can find out what they are by watching this video.

1. Argue

Researchers have proven that hunger makes us less composed. It happens because self-control requires energy, which is in short supply when the stomach is empty.

Advice: If you don’t have time to eat before a discussion, drink something warm, and offer it to your opponent too. This will make the conversation more amicable.

The promised bonus: What you can do when you’re hungry

You’re probably guessing that the most apt thing you can do is to eat some food. But there are other, less obvious things that are best done on an empty stomach.

Solve problems. Your ability to concentrate and attentiveness becomes more acute when you’re hungry. According to researchers, this is the legacy of our early ancestors who had to focus all their efforts to get food. The hunger hormone ghrelin also helps to perform various tasks, stimulating brain activity.

Make choices. If you can’t decide on what to choose — a red skirt or a jean jumpsuit? — try doing it on an empty stomach. Research shows that hunger leads people into more successful, even though more impulsive, decisions. Of course, you’d better not use this method when matters of finances, relationships, or health are at stake.


Monday, 28 August 2017

The Forgot Astronomer George Lemaitre

The only non-controversial thing to say about the combination of science and religion is that it’s controversial. But if you look at Georges Lemaître, you can see that the two don’t have to be sworn enemies. Never heard of him? Many people haven’t, but a certain guy named Albert Einstein was a big fan.

Georges Lemaître, born in Charleroi, Belgium in 1894, was a busy man in the early 20th century. After he was awarded a Belgian War Cross as an army officer in World War I, he earned degrees in math and philosophy at the Catholic University of Leuven. Soon after that, he was ordained as a priest. Ever the scientist, he was given permission to study at prestigious Harvard Observatory while, at the same time, earning his Ph.D in physics from MIT. How’s that for a résumé? In 1927, Lemaître cooked up the revolutionary theory that still impacts how we view our universe today. His article entitled “A Homogeneous Universe of Constant Mass and Increasing Radius accounting for the Radial Velocity of Extra Galactic Nebulae” stated that the universe is expanding. After this groundbreaking paper was published, Lemaître realized he may have missed something. If the universe is always expanding, when and how did all that begin? Boom, baby — literally. He planted the seeds for the Big Bang Theory in a May 9, 1931 letter to Nature. The idea he hatched in that letter would late make its way into a collection of essays written by Lemaître. In it, he calls the beginning of the universe “now without yesterday,” more popularly known as “the day without yesterday.” After a few more scientists pitched in to beef up the idea, it became the Big Bang Theory.

At this point, you’re probably scratching your head wondering how this guy’s name isn’t common knowledge. The only explanation is that there was simply a rain cloud hovering over Lemaître’s head. Sheer bad luck. Let us explain… That groundbreaking 1927 paper that stated the universe is continuously expanding? Though it was undoubtedly Nobel Prize-worthy, astronomy was not yet considered a part of physics, which made this astronomer’s work ineligible for the award. Okay, so he didn’t win the Nobel. But maybe he at least got some credit? Nah, you can find that in Edwin Hubble’s name. Though Lemaître did all the math, Hubble got the credit for providing the observational basis for the things Lemaître crunched numbers on. The things we owe to Lemaître include what’s now known as Hubble’s Law and Hubble’s Constant, as well as the idea that the universe is expanding. Surely the Big Bang thing was a big deal at the time, right? Yes and no; it was met with a lot of criticism because, well, science and religion tend to butt heads. The scientific community was hesitant to go with an origin story that came from a priest. In 1952, Pope Pious XII proclaimed Lemaître’s work was proof of a creator. Lemaître didn’t agree with this interpretation, arguing with the Pope to pipe it down. But perhaps it was too little, too late for the scientific community of the time. At least Einstein knew there was something to this guy. After Lemaître described his theories in January 1933 at the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, Einstein declared, “This is the most beautiful and satisfactory explanation of creation to which I ever listened.”


Tuesday, 22 August 2017

List of unsolved problems in physics

Some of the major unsolved problems in physics are theoretical, meaning that existing theories seem incapable of explaining a certain observed phenomenon or experimental result. The others are experimental, meaning that there is a difficulty in creating an experiment to test a proposed theory or investigate a phenomenon in greater detail. There are still some deficiencies in the Standard Model of physics, such as the origin of mass, the strong CP problem, neutrino oscillations, matter–antimatter asymmetry, and the nature of dark matter and dark energy.[1] Another problem lies within the mathematical framework of the Standard Model itself—the Standard Model is inconsistent with that of general relativity, to the point that one or both theories break down under certain conditions (for example within known spacetime singularities like the Big Bang and the centers of black holes beyond the event horizon). Unsolved problems by subfield Edit The following is a list of unsolved problems grouped into broad area of physics.[2] General physics/quantum physics Edit Arrow of time (e.g. entropy’s arrow of time) Why does time have a direction? Why did the universe have such low entropy in the past, and time correlates with the universal (but not local) increase in entropy, from the past and to the future, according to the second law of thermodynamics?[3] Why are CP violations observed in certain weak force decays, but not elsewhere? Are CP violations somehow a product of the Second Law of Thermodynamics, or are they a separate arrow of time? Are there exceptions to the principle of causality? Is there a single possible past? Is the present moment physically distinct from the past and future, or is it merely an emergent property of consciousness? What links the quantum arrow of time to the thermodynamic arrow? Interpretation of quantum mechanics How does the quantum description of reality, which includes elements such as the superposition of states and wavefunction collapse or quantum decoherence, give rise to the reality we perceive? Another way of stating this question regards the measurement problem: What constitutes a “measurement” which apparently causes the wave function to collapse into a definite state? Unlike classical physical processes, some quantum mechanical processes (such as quantum teleportation arising from quantum entanglement) cannot be simultaneously “local”, “causal”, and “real”, but it is not obvious which of these properties must be sacrificed, or if an attempt to describe quantum mechanical processes in these senses is a category error such that a proper understanding of quantum mechanics would render the question meaningless. Grand Unification Theory/Theory of everything Is there a theory which explains the values of all fundamental physical constants?[3] Is there a theory which explains why the gauge groups of the standard model are as they are, and why observed spacetime has 3 spatial dimensions and 1 temporal dimension? Do “fundamental physical constants” vary over time? Are any of the fundamental particles in the standard model of particle physics actually composite particles too tightly bound to observe as such at current experimental energies? Are there fundamental particles that have not yet been observed, and, if so, which ones are they and what are their properties? Are there unobserved fundamental forces? Yang–Mills theory Given an arbitrary compact gauge group, does a non-trivial quantum Yang–Mills theory with a finite mass gap exist? This problem is also listed as one of the Millennium Prize Problems in mathematics. Physical information Are there physical phenomena, such as wave function collapse or black holes, which irrevocably destroy information about their prior states? How is quantum information stored as a state of a quantum system? Dimensionless physical constant At the present time, the values of the dimensionless physical constants cannot be calculated; they are determined only by physical measurement.[4][5] What is the minimum number of dimensionless physical constants from which all other dimensionless physical constants can be derived? Are dimensional physical constants necessary at all? Fine-tuned Universe The values of the fundamental physical constants are in a narrow range necessary to support carbon-based life.[6][7][8] Is this because there exist other universes with different constants, or are our universe’s constants the result of chance, or some other factor or process? Cosmology and general relativity Edit Problem of time How can time be reconciled with general relativity? Cosmic inflation Is the theory of cosmic inflation correct, and, if so, what are the details of this epoch? What is the hypothetical inflaton field giving rise to inflation? If inflation happened at one point, is it self-sustaining through inflation of quantum-mechanical fluctuations, and thus ongoing in some extremely distant place?[9] Horizon problem Why is the distant universe so homogeneous when the Big Bang theory seems to predict larger measurable anisotropies of the night sky than those observed? Cosmological inflation is generally accepted as the solution, but are other possible explanations such as a variable speed of light more appropriate?[10] Origin and future of the universe How did the conditions for anything to exist arise? Is the universe heading towards a Big Freeze, a Big Rip, a Big Crunch, or a Big Bounce? Or is it part of an infinitely recurring cyclic model? Size of universe The diameter of the observable universe is about 93 billion light-years, but what is the size of the whole universe? Does a multiverse exist? Baryon asymmetry Why is there far more matter than antimatter in the observable universe? Cosmological constant problem Why does the zero-point energy of the vacuum not cause a large cosmological constant? What cancels it out?[11] Estimated distribution of dark matter and dark energy in the universe Dark matter/Galaxy rotation curve What is the identity of dark matter?[10] Is it a particle? Is it the lightest superpartner (LSP)? [Or] Do the phenomena attributed to dark matter point not to some form of matter but actually to an extension of gravity? Dark energy What is the cause of the observed accelerated expansion (de Sitter phase) of the universe? Why is the energy density of the dark energy component of the same magnitude as the density of matter at present when the two evolve quite differently over time; could it be simply that we are observing at exactly the right time? Is dark energy a pure cosmological constant or are models of quintessence such as phantom energy applicable? Dark flow Is a non-spherically symmetric gravitational pull from outside the observable universe responsible for some of the observed motion of large objects such as galactic clusters in the universe? Axis of evil (cosmology) Some large features of the microwave sky at distances of over 13 billion light years appear to be aligned with both the motion and orientation of the solar system. Is this due to systematic errors in processing, contamination of results by local effects, or an unexplained violation of the Copernican principle? Shape of the universe What is the 3-manifold of comoving space, i.e. of a comoving spatial section of the universe, informally called the “shape” of the universe? Neither the curvature nor the topology is presently known, though the curvature is known to be “close” to zero on observable scales. The cosmic inflation hypothesis suggests that the shape of the universe may be unmeasurable, but, since 2003, Jean-Pierre Luminet, et al., and other groups have suggested that the shape of the universe may be the Poincaré dodecahedral space. Is the shape unmeasurable; the Poincaré space; or another 3-manifold? Quantum gravity Edit Vacuum catastrophe Why does the predicted mass of the quantum vacuum have little effect on the expansion of the universe? Quantum gravity Can quantum mechanics and general relativity be realized as a fully consistent theory (perhaps as a quantum field theory)?[12] Is spacetime fundamentally continuous or discrete? Would a consistent theory involve a force mediated by a hypothetical graviton, or be a product of a discrete structure of spacetime itself (as in loop quantum gravity)? Are there deviations from the predictions of general relativity at very small or very large scales or in other extreme circumstances that flow from a quantum gravity theory? Black holes, black hole information paradox, and black hole radiation Do black holes produce thermal radiation, as expected on theoretical grounds? Does this radiation contain information about their inner structure, as suggested by gauge–gravity duality, or not, as implied by Hawking’s original calculation? If not, and black holes can evaporate away, what happens to the information stored in them (since quantum mechanics does not provide for the destruction of information)? Or does the radiation stop at some point leaving black hole remnants? Is there another way to probe their internal structure somehow, if such a structure even exists? Extra dimensions Does nature have more than four spacetime dimensions? If so, what is their size? Are dimensions a fundamental property of the universe or an emergent result of other physical laws? Can we experimentally observe evidence of higher spatial dimensions? The cosmic censorship hypothesis and the chronology protection conjecture Can singularities not hidden behind an event horizon, known as “naked singularities”, arise from realistic initial conditions, or is it possible to prove some version of the “cosmic censorship hypothesis” of Roger Penrose which proposes that this is impossible?[13] Similarly, will the closed timelike curves which arise in some solutions to the equations of general relativity (and which imply the possibility of backwards time travel) be ruled out by a theory of quantum gravity which unites general relativity with quantum mechanics, as suggested by the “chronology protection conjecture” of Stephen Hawking? Locality Are there non-local phenomena in quantum physics? If they exist, are non-local phenomena limited to the entanglement revealed in the violations of the Bell inequalities, or can information and conserved quantities also move in a non-local way? Under what circumstances are non-local phenomena observed? What does the existence or absence of non-local phenomena imply about the fundamental structure of spacetime? How does this relate to quantum entanglement? How does this elucidate the proper interpretation of the fundamental nature of quantum physics? High-energy physics/particle physics Edit See also: Beyond the Standard Model Higgs mechanism Are the branching ratios of the Higgs boson decays consistent with the standard model? Is there only one type of Higgs boson? Hierarchy problem Why is gravity such a weak force? It becomes strong for particles only at the Planck scale, around 1019 GeV, much above the electroweak scale (100 GeV, the energy scale dominating physics at low energies). Why are these scales so different from each other? What prevents quantities at the electroweak scale, such as the Higgs boson mass, from getting quantum corrections on the order of the Planck scale? Is the solution supersymmetry, extra dimensions, or just anthropic fine-tuning? Planck particle The Planck mass plays an important role in parts of mathematical physics. A series of researchers have suggested the existence of a fundamental particle with mass equal to or close to that of the Planck mass. The Planck mass is however enormous compared to any detected particle even compared to the Higgs particle. While working at the Rutherford Laboratory, Lloyd Motz suggested that such a particle with Planck mass likely had existed but that most of its mass had radiated away. Others have suggested particles with close to the Planck mass are micro black holes. It is still an unsolved problem if there exist or even have existed a particle with close to the Planck mass. This is indirectly related to the hierarchy problem. Magnetic monopoles Did particles that carry “magnetic charge” exist in some past, higher-energy epoch? If so, do any remain today? (Paul Dirac showed the existence of some types of magnetic monopoles would explain charge quantization.)[14] Proton decay and spin crisis Is the proton fundamentally stable? Or does it decay with a finite lifetime as predicted by some extensions to the standard model?[15] How do the quarks and gluons carry the spin of protons?[16] Supersymmetry Is spacetime supersymmetry realized at TeV scale? If so, what is the mechanism of supersymmetry breaking? Does supersymmetry stabilize the electroweak scale, preventing high quantum corrections? Does the lightest supersymmetric particle (LSP or Lightest Supersymmetric Particle) comprise dark matter? Generations of matter Why are there three generations of quarks and leptons? Is there a theory that can explain the masses of particular quarks and leptons in particular generations from first principles (a theory of Yukawa couplings)?[17] Neutrino mass What is the mass of neutrinos, whether they follow Dirac or Majorana statistics? Is mass hierarchy normal or inverted? Is the CP violating phase 0?[18][19][20] Colour confinement Why has there never been measured a free quark or gluon, but only objects that are built out of them, such as mesons and baryons? How does this phenomenon emerge from QCD? Strong CP problem and axions Why is the strong nuclear interaction invariant to parity and charge conjugation? Is Peccei–Quinn theory the solution to this problem? Could axions be the main component of dark matter? Anomalous magnetic dipole moment Why is the experimentally measured value of the muon’s anomalous magnetic dipole moment (“muon g−2”) significantly different from the theoretically predicted value of that physical constant?[21] Proton radius puzzle What is the electric charge radius of the proton? How does it differ from gluonic charge? Pentaquarks and other exotic hadrons What combinations of quarks are possible? Why were pentaquarks so difficult to discover?[22] Are they a tightly-bound system of five elementary particles, or a more weakly-bound pairing of a baryon and a meson?[23] Astronomy and astrophysics Edit Relativistic jet. The environment around the AGN where the relativistic plasma is collimated into jets which escape along the pole of the supermassive black hole Astrophysical jet Why do the accretion discs surrounding certain astronomical objects, such as the nuclei of active galaxies, emit relativistic jets along their polar axes?[24] Why are there quasi-periodic oscillations in many accretion discs?[25] Why does the period of these oscillations scale as the inverse of the mass of the central object?[26] Why are there sometimes overtones, and why do these appear at different frequency ratios in different objects?[27] Solar cycle How does the Sun generate its periodically reversing large-scale magnetic field? How do other solar-like stars generate their magnetic fields, and what are the similarities and differences between stellar activity cycles and that of the Sun?[28] What caused the Maunder Minimum and other grand minima, and how does the solar cycle recover from a minima state? Coronal heating problem Why is the Sun’s corona (atmosphere layer) so much hotter than the Sun’s surface? Why is the magnetic reconnection effect many orders of magnitude faster than predicted by standard models? Diffuse interstellar bands What is responsible for the numerous interstellar absorption lines detected in astronomical spectra? Are they molecular in origin, and if so which molecules are responsible for them? How do they form? Supermassive black holes What is the origin of the M-sigma relation between supermassive black hole mass and galaxy velocity dispersion?[29] How did the most distant quasars grow their supermassive black holes up to 1010 solar masses so early in the history of the universe? Rotation curve of a typical spiral galaxy: predicted (A) and observed (B). Can the discrepancy between the curves be attributed to dark matter? Kuiper cliff Why does the number of objects in the Solar System’s Kuiper belt fall off rapidly and unexpectedly beyond a radius of 50 astronomical units? Flyby anomaly Why is the observed energy of satellites flying by Earth sometimes different by a minute amount from the value predicted by theory? Galaxy rotation problem Is dark matter responsible for differences in observed and theoretical speed of stars revolving around the centre of galaxies, or is it something else? Supernovae What is the exact mechanism by which an implosion of a dying star becomes an explosion? p-nuclei What astrophysical process is responsible for the nucleogenesis of these rare isotopes? Ultra-high-energy cosmic ray [10] Why is it that some cosmic rays appear to possess energies that are impossibly high, given that there are no sufficiently energetic cosmic ray sources near the Earth? Why is it that (apparently) some cosmic rays emitted by distant sources have energies above the Greisen–Zatsepin–Kuzmin limit?[3][10] Rotation rate of Saturn Why does the magnetosphere of Saturn exhibit a (slowly changing) periodicity close to that at which the planet’s clouds rotate? What is the true rotation rate of Saturn’s deep interior?[30] Origin of magnetar magnetic field What is the origin of magnetar magnetic field? Large-scale anisotropy Is the universe at very large scales anisotropic, making the cosmological principle an invalid assumption? The number count and intensity dipole anisotropy in radio, NRAO VLA Sky Survey (NVSS) catalogue[31] is inconsistent with the local motion as derived from cosmic microwave background[32][33] and indicate an intrinsic dipole anisotropy. The same NVSS radio data also shows an intrinsic dipole in polarization density and degree of polarization[34] in the same direction as in number count and intensity. There are other several observation revealing large-scale anisotropy. The optical polarization from quasars shows polarization alignment over a very large scale of Gpc.[35][36][37] The cosmic-microwave-background data shows several features of anisotropy,[38][39][40][41] which are not consistent with the Big Bang model. Space roar Why is space roar six times louder than expected? What is the source of space roar? Age–metallicity relation in the Galactic disk Is there a universal age–metallicity relation (AMR) in the Galactic disk (both “thin” and “thick” parts of the disk)? Although in the local (primarily thin) disk of the Milky Way there is no evidence of a strong AMR,[42] a sample of 229 nearby “thick” disk stars has been used to investigate the existence of an age–metallicity relation in the Galactic thick disk, and indicate that there is an age–metallicity relation present in the thick disk.[43][44] Stellar ages from asteroseismology confirm the lack of any strong age-metallicity relation in the Galactic disc.[45] The lithium problem Why is there a discrepancy between the amount of lithium-7 predicted to be produced in Big Bang nucleosynthesis and the amount observed in very old stars?[46] Solar wind interaction with comets In 2007 the Ulysses spacecraft passed through the tail of comet C/2006 P1 (McNaught) and found surprising results concerning the interaction of the solar wind with the tail. Ultraluminous pulsar The ultraluminous X-ray source M82 X-2 was thought to be a black hole, but in October 2014 data from NASA’s space-based X-ray telescope NuStar indicated that M82 X-2 is a pulsar many times brighter than the Eddington limit. The injection problem Fermi acceleration is thought to be the primary mechanism that accelerates astrophysical particles to high energy. However, it is unclear what mechanism causes those particles to initially have energies high enough for Fermi acceleration to work on them.[47] Fast radio bursts Transient radio pulses lasting only a few milliseconds, from emission regions thought to be no larger than a few hundred kilometres, and estimated to occur several hundred times a day. While several theories have been proposed, there is no generally accepted explanation for them. They may come from cosmological distances, but there is no consensus on this, either.[citation needed] Nature of KIC 8462852 What is the origin of unusual luminosity changes of this star? Fermi paradox Do extraterrestrial civilizations exist? If so, why do we not see them? Nature of Wow! signal Was that a real signal and, if so, what is the origin of it?[48] Planetary systems How does accretion form planetary systems?[49] Where did Earth’s water come from?[49] Nuclear physics Edit The “island of stability” in the proton vs. neutron number plot for heavy nuclei Quantum chromodynamics What are the phases of strongly interacting matter, and what roles do they play in the evolution of cosmos? What is the detailed partonic structure of the nucleons? What does QCD predict for the properties of strongly interacting matter? What determines the key features of QCD, and what is their relation to the nature of gravity and spacetime? Do glueballs exist? Do gluons acquire mass dynamically despite having a zero rest mass, within hadrons? Does QCD truly lack CP-violations? Do gluons saturate[disambiguation needed] when their occupation number is large? Do gluons form a dense system called Colour Glass Condensate? What are the signatures and evidences for the Balitsky-Fadin-Kuarev-Lipatov, Balitsky-Kovchegov, Catani-Ciafaloni-Fiorani-Marchesini evolution equations? Nuclei and nuclear astrophysics What is the nature of the nuclear force that binds protons and neutrons into stable nuclei and rare isotopes? What is the nature of exotic excitations in nuclei at the frontiers of stability and their role in stellar processes? What is the nature of neutron stars and dense nuclear matter? What is the origin of the elements in the cosmos? What are the nuclear reactions that drive stars and stellar explosions? Atomic, molecular and optical physics Edit Abraham–Minkowski controversy What is the momentum of light in optical media? Bose–Einstein condensation How do we rigorously prove the existence of Bose–Einstein condensates for general interacting systems?[50] Condensed matter physics Edit A sample of a cuprate superconductor (specifically BSCCO). The mechanism for superconductivity of these materials is unknown. High-temperature superconductors What is the mechanism that causes certain materials to exhibit superconductivity at temperatures much higher than around 25 kelvin? Is it possible to make a material that is a superconductor at room temperature?[3] Amorphous solids What is the nature of the glass transition between a fluid or regular solid and a glassy phase? What are the physical processes giving rise to the general properties of glasses and the glass transition?[51][52] Cryogenic electron emission Why does the electron emission in the absence of light increase as the temperature of a photomultiplier is decreased?[53][54] Sonoluminescence What causes the emission of short bursts of light from imploding bubbles in a liquid when excited by sound?[55][56] Turbulence Is it possible to make a theoretical model to describe the statistics of a turbulent flow (in particular, its internal structures)?[3] Also, under what conditions do smooth solutions to the Navier–Stokes equations exist? This problem is also listed as one of the Millennium Prize Problems in mathematics. Alfvénic turbulence In the solar wind and the turbulence in solar flares, coronal mass ejections, and magnetospheric substorms are major unsolved problems in space plasma physics.[57] Topological order Is topological order stable at non-zero temperature? Equivalently, is it possible to have three-dimensional self-correcting quantum memory?[58] Fractional Hall effect What mechanism explains the existence of the {\displaystyle u=5/2} {\displaystyle u=5/2} state in the fractional quantum Hall effect? Does it describe quasiparticles with non-Abelian fractional statistics?[citation needed] Magnetoresistance in a {\displaystyle u=8/5} {\displaystyle u=8/5} fractional quantum Hall state. Liquid crystals Can the nematic to smectic (A) phase transition in liquid crystal states be characterized as a universal phase transition?[59][60] Semiconductor nanocrystals What is the cause of the nonparabolicity of the energy-size dependence for the lowest optical absorption transition of quantum dots?[61] Whisker (metallurgy) In electrical devices, some metallic surfaces may spontaneously grow fine metallic whiskers, which can lead to equipment failures. While compressive mechanical stress is known to encourage whisker formation, the growth mechanism has yet to be determined. Plasma physics Edit Plasma physics and fusion power Fusion energy may potentially provide power from abundant resource (e.g. hydrogen) without the type of radioactive waste that fission energy currently produces. However, can ionized gases (plasma) be confined long enough and at a high enough temperature to create fusion power? What is the physical origin of H-mode?[62] Biophysics Edit Stochasticity and robustness to noise in gene expression How do genes govern our body, withstanding different external pressures and internal stochasticity? Certain models exist for genetic processes, but we are far from understanding the whole picture, in particular in development where gene expression must be tightly regulated. Quantitative study of the immune system What are the quantitative properties of immune responses? What are the basic building blocks of immune system networks? Unified brain processing theory How to unify physics and neuroscience?[63] Homochirality What is the origin of the preponderance of specific enantiomers in biochemical systems?


Friday, 11 August 2017

Introduction
In digital logic design, circuits fall into two categories:combinational logic and sequential logic.

Combinational logic circuits are implementation of Booleanfunctions. They compute their outputs as functions of theirinput. They do not have any memory elements.

Sequential logic circuits, implement functions with state.That is, they keep information internally (think of this informationbeing stored in data members of an object). The output of a sequentialcircuit depends not only on the input bits, but also on the internalstate.

It turns out, for sequential circuits, it’s easier to designwith a clock.

So, what’s a clock?

Most people think of a clock as a way to tell time. Why woulda computer need to know how to tell time?

A clock, on a computer, isn’t the same kind of clock usedin your home, or on a watch. If you’ve ever bought a computer,one of the more important features it the clock rate. For example,you may buy a machine that’s running at 2 GHz. Do you knowwhat 2 GHz refers to? It refers to a clock!

Timing Diagram of a Clock

The behavior of a clock can be easily described using atiming diagram. A timing diagram has timeon the horizontal axis (x-axis) and the voltage on thevertical axis (y-axis). For simplicity, we use 0 and 1,instead of voltages.

Here’s an example

A clock is a device that alternates between 0 and 1, repeatedly.We can define key features of this plot.

The most important is the amount of time it takes before thesignal repeats. This time is called the period, which we call T. In this period, there is a single cycle.

The period is related to the frequency, f. In fact,they are inversely related f = 1/T. The frequency meanshow many times the waveform repeats per second. The unit ofmeasurement for frequency is Hz (pronounced Hertz), andis the same as s-1 (inverse seconds).

The higher the frequency, the shorter the period of one cycle.When you hear a clock is 1 GHz, this means there is 109cycles per second (G = giga = 109).

Consequently, the period is 10-9seconds, which isa nanosecond.

Look at one cycle of the clock.

In this one cycle, the clock has an output of 1 for part of thetime, and 0 for part of the time. Now it appears that it is 1 forhalf the time (i.e., for T/2), and 0 for half the time, but it turnsout it’s not that important for the clock to have that property.It’s OK if the clock is 1 for 3/4 T and 0 for 1/4 T, even thoughit’s fairly common for it to be T/2 and T/2.

Clock Edges

A clock also has “edges”. These are the times that the clocktransitions from 0 to 1 (this is called a positive edge) orfrom 1 to 0 (this is called a negative edge). In the originalclock diagram at the top, the edges are shown to go instantaneouslyfrom 0 to 1. In reality, that does not happen.

The clock looks more like:

In other words, there’s a small amount of time to transition from 0to 1 (call the rise time) and a small amount of time totransition from 1 to 0 (called the fall time). The timingdiagram has been exaggerated to make the rise and fall time more obvious.In general, those times are very short compared to the time the clockstays at 1 or 0. On the diagram, you see the label “positive”. This indicates a0 to 1 transition. That transition is considered a positive edge(since it has a positive slope). The 1 to 0 transition is calleda negative edge (since it has a negative slope).

Why Are Clock Edges Important?

Flip flops (and registers, which are built from flip flops) are timeddevices. They use a clock.

A flip flop can store 1 bit of information. In a positiveedge-triggered flip flop, the value stored in the flip flop can onlychange when a positive edge occurs. Thus, it can only change atthe circled portion (shown in the previous figure) that says “positive”.

At all other times (i.e., when the clock is steady at 1, or steadyat 0, or transitioning from 1 to 0 on a negative edge), the flip flopholds its value. That is, its value can not change.

Thus, edge triggered flip flops can only change its values atthe edge of a clock.

You might wonder why flip flops are designed this way, whencombinational logic circuits (i.e., AND gates, OR gates, etc)do not use any clocks.

It turns out that its easier to design digital circuits whichcan only change values at an edge. This will be explained later.

Why Not Faster Clocks?

If you’ve used a computer, you’ve heard clock rates get fasterand faster. In 1980, personal computers ran as slow as 4.77 MHz.Modern CPUs now run at 3 Ghz. It was probably fairly easy tocreate a very fast clock. I’m sure you can create clocks thatare 10 GHz or faster. However, circuits have to be built smallenough so that they can operate at the speed of the clock.

If you run a CPU with a clock rate that’s way too high, thenit may not complete certain computations before the clock edgeappears.

It’s similar to a conductor conducting an orchestra. Hecan only conduct the pace so quickly before the players can notkeep up with pace without making mistakes.

In a computer, it takes time to perform computations. Astechnology gets better, this time can be shortened, and the clockcan therefore be made quicker.

Summary

Here’s a summary of clocks.

  • A clock is a periodic signal that alternates between 0 and 1.
  • The time it takes for a waveform to repeat is called a period. We usually use T to indicate period.
  • The frequency of a clock is the inverse of the period. Thus,f = 1/T. The smaller the period, the larger the frequency.
  • Frequency is measured as s-1 which is inverseseconds. This is also called Hertz, abbreviated Hz.
  • A clock does not necessarily output 1 half the time, and output 0the other half, although it is common for this to happen.
  • A clock has a positive edge (which is the time it transitionsfrom 0 to 1) and a negative edge (which is the time it transitions from1 to 0).
  • Clock rates are determined by how fast a CPU can performan operation. The faster an operation can be performed, the fasteryou can set the clock rate.
  • Clock rates for modern CPUs are in the gigahertz range. Inthis case, giga refers to 109 (as opposed to gigabytes,which is 230)

Wednesday, 9 August 2017

Geoengineering Is The Controversial Plan To Stop Climate Change By Hacking The Planet

Why classical Physics relavant to Quantum

When it comes to particle physics, there’s a sense that every law we know about classical physics just doesn’t apply. In a lot of cases, that’s disturbingly true. But some laws stay the same no matter how big or how small your subject. See how classical thermodynamics works on a quantum scale below, then keep scrolling for examples of quantum weirdness.


Human bone is stronger than steel

Your bones are incredibly strong. Ounce for ounce, bone is stronger than steel. One cubic inch of bone can withstand the weight of five standard pickup trucks, give or take a few pounds. If you’re looking for the specifics to snap a piece of your skeleton, it takes about 4,000 newtons of force to break the typical human femur. But don’t run out and start applying pressure to femurs and then get upset at us when things don’t crack correctly. A lot depends on the bone itself, its position in the body, and the angle of attack. The age, diet, and lifestyle of the bone-owner also plays a role. Before you go all Chuck Norris on bystanders to try this yourself.


Friday, 28 July 2017

Have you think what social media gives you?

Yes. You are right. Have you ever thought about it? From the internet, we gain manythings, its true. But you also give manythings to internet.

Here are some are things you take from internet

  • Knowledge
  • Official advantage
  • Working advantage
  • Financial advantage
  • Frienship with stranger???

Do you think friendship with stranger gives you advantage? Chatting with him/her gives you fun? Not at all. Actually this types chatting actually taking you to the not curable illness. You can get cancer on your brain if you are spending more hours on your phone, tablet or your computer/laptop. This social sites actually eats up your memory and brain with your eyes. Your IQ potential also decreases with more spending hour in internet. The more you will be updated to the modernity, you will waste your brain. So keep yourself safe from internet. Specially, who are below 25.

You can browse internet for 20 to 30 minute maximum to search your problem of educational life or working life. But, beside it, you are in danger. Believe it, earth is not in danger, but you are in.


Sunday, 23 July 2017

Airplanes

We take for it granted that we can fly from one side of the world to the other in a matter of hours, but a century ago this amazing ability to race through the air had only just been discovered. What would the Wright brothers—the pioneers of powered flight—make of an age in which something like 100,000 planes take to the sky each day in the United States alone? They’d be amazed, of course, and delighted too. Thanks to their successful experiments with powered flight, the airplane is rightfully recognized as one of the greatest inventions of all time. Let’s take a closer look at how it works!

Photo: You need big wings to lift a big plane like this US Air Force C-17 Globemaster. The wings are 51.75m (169ft) wide—that’s just slightly less than the plane’s body length of 53m (174ft). The maximum takeoff weight is 265,352kg (585,000lb), about as much as 40 adult elephants! Photo by Jeremy Lock courtesy of US Air Force.

How do planes fly?

If you’ve ever watched a jet plane taking off or coming in to land, the first thing you’ll have noticed is the noise of the engines. Jet engines, which are long metal tubes burning a continuous rush of fuel and air, are far noisier (and far more powerful) than traditional propeller engines. You might think engines are the key to making a plane fly, but you’d be wrong. Things can fly quite happily without engines, as gliders (planes with no engines), paper planes, and indeed gliding birds readily show us.

Forces acting on a flying plane: thrust, weight, drag, and lift

Photo: Four forces act on a plane in flight. When the plane flies horizontally at a steady speed, lift from the wings exactly balances the plane’s weight and the thrust exactly balances the drag. However, during takeoff, or when the plane is attempting to climb in the sky (as shown here), the thrust from the engines pushing the plane forward exceeds the drag (air resistance) pulling it back. This creates a lift force, greater than the plane’s weight, which powers the plane higher into the sky. Photo by Nathanael Callon courtesy of US Air Force.

If you’re trying to understand how planes fly, you need to be clear about the difference between the engines and the wings and the different jobs they do. A plane’s engines are designed to move it forward at high speed. That makes air flow rapidly over the wings, which throw the air down toward the ground, generating an upward force called lift that overcomes the plane’s weight and holds it in the sky. So it’s the engines that move a plane forward, while the wings move it upward.

Diagram showing Newton's third law of motion applied to the wings and engines of a plane.

Photo: Newton’s third law of motion explains how the engines and wings work together to make a plane move through the sky. The force of the hot exhaust gas shooting backward from the jet engine pushes the plane forward. That creates a moving current of air over the wings. The wings force the air downward and that pushes the plane upward. Photo by Samuel Rogers (with added annotations by explainthatstuff.com) courtesy of US Air Force. Read more about how engines work in our detailed article on jet engines.

How do wings make lift?

In one sentence, wings make lift by changing the direction and pressure of the air that crashes into them as the engines shoot them through the sky.

Pressure differences

Okay, so the wings are the key to making something fly—but how do they work? Most airplane wings have a curved upper surface and a flatter lower surface, making a cross-sectional shape called an airfoil(or aerofoil, if you’re British):

Photo showing airfoil wing on the NASA Centurion solar-powered plane.
Photo: An airfoil wing typically has a curved upper surface and a flat lower surface. This is the wing on NASA’s solar-powered Centurion plane. Photo by Tom Tschida courtesy of NASA Armstrong Flight Research Center.

In a lot of science books and web pages, you’ll read an incorrect explanation of how an airfoil like this generates lift. It goes like this: When air rushes over the curved upper wing surface, it has to travel furtherthan the air that passes underneath, so it has to go faster (to cover more distance in the same time). According to a principle of aerodynamics called Bernoulli’s law, fast-moving air is at lower pressure than slow-moving air, so the pressure above the wing is lower than the pressure below, and this creates the lift that powers the plane upward.

Although this explanation of how wings work is widely repeated, it’s wrong: it gives the right answer, but for completely the wrong reasons! Think about it for a moment and you’ll see that if it were true, acrobatic planes couldn’t fly upside down. Flipping a plane over would produce “downlift” and send it crashing to the ground. Not only that, but it’s perfectly possible to design planes with airfoils that are symmetrical (looking straight down the wing) and they still produce lift. For example, paper airplanes (and ones made from thin balsa wood) generate lift even though they have flat wings.

The popular explanation of lift is common, quick, sounds logical and gives the correct answer, yet also introduces misconceptions, uses a nonsensical physical argument and misleadingly invokes Bernoulli’s equation.”

Professor Holger Babinsky, Cambridge University

But the standard explanation of lift is problematic for another important reason as well: the air shooting over the wing doesn’t have to stay in step with the air going underneath it, and nothing says it has to travel a bigger distance in the same time. Imagine two air molecules arriving at the front of the wing and separating, so one shoots up over the top and the other whistles straight under the bottom. There’s no reason why those two molecules have to arrive at exactly the same time at the back end of the wing: they could meet up with other air molecules instead. This flaw in the standard explanation of an airfoil goes by the technical name of the “equal transit theory.” That’s just a fancy name for the (incorrect) idea that the air stream splits apart at the front of the airfoil and meets up neatly again at the back.

An airfoil generates lift through a combination of pressure differences and downwash: the air moves down, so the plane moves up.

So what’s the real explanation? As a curved airfoil wing flies through the sky, it deflects air and alters the air pressure above and below it. That’s intuitively obvious. Think how it feels when you slowly walk through a swimming pool and feel the force of the water pushing against your body: your body is diverting the flow of water as it pushes through it, and an airfoil wing does the same thing (much more dramatically—because that’s what it’s designed to do). As a plane flies forward, the curved upper part of the wing lowers the air pressure directly above it, so it moves upward.

Why does this happen? As air flows over the curved upper surface, its natural inclination is to move in a straight line, but the curve of the wing pulls it around and back down. For this reason, the air is effectively stretched out into a bigger volume—the same number of air molecules forced to occupy more space—and this is what lowers its pressure. For exactly the opposite reason, the pressure of the air under the wing increases: the advancing wing squashes the air molecules in front of it into a smaller space. The difference in air pressure between the upper and lower surfaces causes a big difference in air speed (not the other way around, as in the traditional theory of a wing). The difference in speed (observed in actual wind tunnel experiments) is much bigger than you’d predict from the simple (equal transit) theory. So if our two air molecules separate at the front, the one going over the top arrives at the tail end of the wing much faster than the one going under the bottom. No matter when they arrive, both of those molecules will be speeding downward—and this helps to produce lift in a second important way.

How airfoil wings generate lift#1: An airfoil splits apart the incoming air, lowers the pressure of the upper air stream, and accelerates both air streams downward. As the air accelerates downward, the wing (and the plane) move upward. The more an airfoil diverts the path of the oncoming air, the more lift it generates.

Downwash

If you’ve ever stood near a helicopter, you’ll know exactly how it stays in the sky: it creates a huge “downwash” (downward moving draft) of air that balances its weight. Helicopter rotors are very similar to airplane airfoils, but spin around in a circle instead of moving forward in a straight line, like the ones on a plane. Even so, airplanes create downwash in exactly the same way as helicopters—it’s just that we don’t notice. The downwash isn’t so obvious, but it’s just as important as it is with a chopper.

This second aspect of making lift is a lot easier to understand than pressure differences, at least for a physicist: according to Isaac Newton’s third law of motion, if air gives an upward force to a plane, the plane must give an (equal and opposite) downward force to the air. So a plane also generates lift by using its wings to push air downward behind it. That happens because the wings aren’t perfectly horizontal, as you might suppose, but tilted back very slightly so they hit the air at an angle of attack. The angled wings push down both the accelerated airflow (from up above them) and the slower moving airflow (from beneath them), and this produces lift. Since the curved top of the airfoil deflects (pushes down) more air than the straighter bottom (in other words, alters the path of the incoming air much more dramatically), it produces significantly more lift.

Animation showing how the angle of attack of a wing changes the lift it produces.

How airfoil wings generate lift#2: The curved shape of a wing creates an area of low pressure up above it (red), which generates lift. The low pressure makes air accelerate over the wing, and the curved shape of the wing (and the higher air pressure well above the altered air stream) forces that air into a powerful downwash, also pushing the plane up. This animation shows how different angles of attack (the angle between the wing and the incoming air) change the low pressure region above a wing and the lift it makes. When a wing is flat, its curved upper surface creates a modest region of low pressure and a modest amount of lift (red). As the angle of attack increases, the lift increases dramatically too—up to a point, when increasing drag makes the plane stall (see below). If we tilt the wing downward, we produce lower pressure underneath it, making the plane fall. Based on Aerodynamics, a public domain War Department training film from 1941.

You might be wondering why the air flows down behind a wing at all. Why, for example, doesn’t it hit the front of the wing, curve over the top, and then carry on horizontally? Why is there a downwash rather than simply a horizontal “backwash”? Think back to our previous discussion of pressure: a wing lowers the air pressure immediately above it. Higher up, well above the plane, the air is still at its normal pressure, which is higher than the air immediately above the wing. So the normal-pressure air well above the wing pushes down on the lower-pressure air immediately above it, effectively “squirting” air down and behind the wing in a backwash. In other words, the pressure difference that a wing creates and the downwash of air behind it aren’t two separate things but all part and parcel of the same effect: an angled airfoil wing creates a pressure difference that makes a downwash, and this produces lift.

Now we can see that wings are devices designed to push air downward, it’s easy to understand why planes with flat or symmetrical wings (or upside-down stunt planes) can still safely fly. As long as the wings are creating a downward flow of air, the plane will experience an equal and opposite force—lift—that will keep it in the air. In other words, the upside-down pilot creates a particular angle of attack that generates just enough low pressure above the wing to keep the plane in the air.

How much lift can you make?

Generally, the air flowing over the top and bottom of a wing follows the curve of the wing surfaces very closely—just as you might follow it if you were tracing its outline with a pen. But as the angle of attack increases, the smooth airflow behind the wing starts to break down and become more turbulent and that reduces the lift. At a certain angle (generally round about 15°, though it varies), the air no longer flows smoothly around the wing. There’s a big increase in drag, a big reduction in lift, and the plane is said to have stalled. That’s a slightly confusing term because the engines keep running and the plane keeps flying; stall simply means a loss of lift.

Air flow around an airfoil wing in a wind tunnel

Photo: How a plane stalls: Here’s an airfoil wing in a wind tunnel facing the oncoming air at a steep angle of attack. You can see lines of smoke-filled air approaching from the right and deviating around the wing as they move to the left. Normally, the airflow lines would follow the shape (profile) of the wing very closely. Here, because of the steep angle of attack, the air flow has separated out behind the wing and turbulence and drag have increased significantly. A plane flying like this would experience a sudden loss of lift, which we call “stall.” Photo courtesy of NASA Langley Research Center.

Planes can fly without airfoil-shaped wings; you’ll know that if you’ve ever made a paper airplane—and it was proved on December 17, 1903 by the Wright brothers. In their original “Flying Machine” patent (US patent #821393), it’s clear that slightly tilted wings (which they referred to as “aeroplanes”) are the key parts of their invention. Their “aeroplanes” were simply pieces of cloth stretched over a wooden framework; they didn’t have an airfoil (aerofoil) profile. The Wrights realized that the angle of attack is crucial: “In flying machines of the character to which this invention relates the apparatus is supported in the air by reason of the contact between the air and the under surface of one or more aeroplanes, the contact-surface being presented at a small angle of incidence to the air.” [Emphasis added]. Although the Wrights were brilliant experimental scientists, it’s important to remember that they lacked our modern knowledge of aerodynamics and a full understanding of exactly how wings work.

Not surprisingly, the bigger the wings, the more lift they create: doubling the area of a wing (that’s the flat area you see looking down from above) doubles both the lift and drag it makes. That’s why gigantic planes (like the C-17 Globemaster in our top photo) have gigantic wings. But small wings can also produce a great deal of lift if they move fast enough. To produce extra lift at takeoff, planes have flaps on their wings they can extend to push more air down. Lift and drag vary with the square of your speed, so if a plane goes twice as fast, relative to the oncoming air, its wings produce four times as much lift (and drag). Helicopters produce a huge amount of lift by spinning their rotor blades (essentially thin wings that spin in a circle) very quickly.

Wing vortices

Now a plane doesn’t throw air down behind it in a completely clean way. (You could imagine, for example, someone pushing a big crate of air out of the back door of a military transporter so it falls straight down. But it doesn’t work quite like that!) Each wing actually sends air down by making a spinning vortex (a kind of mini tornado) immediately behind it. It’s a bit like when you’re standing on a platform at a railroad station and a high-speed train rushes past without stopping, leaving what feels like a huge sucking vacuum in its wake. With a plane, the vortex is quite a complex shape and most of it is moving downward—but not all. There’s a huge draft of air moving down in the center, but some air actually swirls upward either side of the wingtips, reducing lift.

Wing vortex shown by colored smoke Wing vortex studied in a wind tunnel
Photo: Newton’s laws make airplanes fly: A plane generates an upward force (lift) by pushing air down toward the ground. As these photos show, the air moves down not in a neat and tidy stream but in a vortex. Among other things, the vortex affects how closely one plane can fly behind another and it’s particularly important near airports where there are lots of planes moving all the time, making complex patterns of turbulence in the air. Left: Colored smoke shows the wing vortices produced by a real plane. The smoke in the center is moving downward, but it’s moving upward beyond the wingtips. Right: How the vortex appears from below. White smoke shows the same effect on a smaller scale in a wind tunnel test. Both photos courtesy of NASA Langley Research Center.

How do planes steer?

What is steering?

Steering anything—from a skateboard or a bicycle to a car or a jumbo jet—means you change the direction in which it’s traveling. In scientific terms, changing something’s direction of travel means you change its velocity, which is the speed it has in a particular direction. Even if it goes at the same speed, if you change the direction of travel, you change the velocity. Changing something’s velocity (including its direction of travel) means you accelerate it. Again, it doesn’t matter if the speed stays the same: a change in direction always means a change in velocity and an acceleration. Newton’s laws of motion tell us that you can only accelerate something (change its speed or direction of travel) by using a force—in other words, by pushing or pulling it somehow. To cut a long story short, if you want to steer something you need to apply a force to it.

An airplane banks at a steep angle

Photo: Steering a plane by banking at a steep angle. Photo by Ben Bloker courtesy of US Air Force.

Another way of looking at steering is to think of it as making something stop going in a straight line and start going in a circle. That means you have to give it what’s called a centripetal force. Things that are moving in a circle (or steering in a curve, which is part of a circle) always have something acting on them to give them centripetal force. If you’re driving a car round a bend, the centripetal force comes from friction between the four tires and the road. If you’re cycling around a curve at speed, some of your centripetal force comes from the tires and some comes from leaning into the bend. If you’re on a skateboard, you can tilt the deck and lean over so your weight helps to provide centripetal force. In each case, you steer in a circle because something provides the centripetal force that pulls your path away from a straight line and round into a curve.

Steering in theory

If you’re in a plane, you’re obviously not in contact with the ground, so where does the centripetal force come from to help you steer around a circle? Just like a cyclist leaning into a bend, a plane “leans” into a curve. Steering involves banking, where the plane tilts to one side and one wing dips lower than the other. The plane’s overall lift is tilted at an angle and, although most of the lift still acts upward, some now acts sideways. This sideways part of the lift provides the centripetal force that makes the plane go round in a circle. Since there’s less lift acting upward, there’s less to balance the plane’s weight. That’s why turning a plane in a circle will make it lose lift and altitude (height) unless the pilot does something else to compensate, such as using the elevators (the flight control surfaces at the back of the plane) to increase the angle of attack and therefore raise the lift again.

Diagram showing the forces (lift, weight, and centripetal) on a plane as it banks at various angles.

Artwork: When a plane banks, the lift generated by its wings tilts at an angle. Most of the lift still acts upward, but some tilts to one side, providing centripetal force that makes the plane steer round in a circle. The steeper the angle of the bank, the more the lift is tilted to the side, the less upward force there is to balance the weight, and the greater the loss of altitude (unless the pilot compensates).

Steering in practice

There’s a steering control in the cockpit, but that’s the only thing a plane has in common with a car. How do you steer something that’s flying through the air at high speed? Simple! You make the air flow in a different way past the wings on each side. Planes are moved up and down, steered from side to side, and brought to a halt by a complex collection of moving flaps called control surfaces on the leading and trailing edges of the wings and tail. These are called ailerons, elevators, rudders, spoilers, and air brakes. Now flying a plane is very complex and I’m not writing a pilot’s manual here: this is just a very basic introduction to the science of forces and motion as they apply to airplanes. For a simple overview of all the different plane controls and how they work, take a look at Wikipedia’s article on control surfaces. NASA’s basic introduction to flight has a good drawing of airplane cockpit controls and how you use them to steer a plane. You’ll find much more detail in the official FAA Pilot’s Handbook of Aeronautical Knowledge (Chapter 6 covers the flight controls).

One way to understand control surfaces is to build yourself a paper plane and experiment. First, build yourself a basic paper plane and make sure it flies in a straight line. Then cut or rip the back of the wings to make some ailerons. Tilt them up and down and see what effect they have in different positions. Tilt one up and one down and see what difference that makes. Then try making a new plane with one wing bigger than the other (or heavier, by adding paperclips). The way to make a paper plane steer is to get one wing to generate more lift than the other—and you can do this in all kinds of different ways!

More parts of a plane

Wright brothers flight at Kitty Hawk

Photo: The Wright brothers took a very scientific approach to flight, meticulously testing every feature of their planes. Here they are pictured during one of their first powered flights on December 17, 1903. Courtesy of NASA on the Commons.

Here are some other key parts of planes:

  • Fuel tanks: You need fuel to power a plane—lots of it. An Airbus A380 holds over 310,000 liters (82,000 gallons) of fuel, which is about 25,000 times as much as a typical car! The fuel’s safely packed inside the plane’s huge wings.
  • Landing gear: Planes take off and land on sturdy wheels and tires, which are rapidly retracted into the undercarriage (the plane’s underbody) byhydraulic rams to reduce drag (air resistance) when they’re in the sky.
  • Radio and radar: The Wright brothers had to fly their pioneering Kitty Hawk plane entirely by sight. That didn’t matter because it flew near the ground, stayed in the air for only 12 seconds, and there were no other planes to worry about! These days, the skies are packed with planes that fly by day, by night, and in all kinds of weather. Radio, radar, and satellite systems are essential for navigation.
  • Pressurized cabins: Air pressure falls with height above Earth’s surface—that’s why mountaineers need to use oxygen cylinders to reach extreme heights. The summit of Mount Everest is just under 9km (5.5 miles) above sea level, but jet planes routinely fly at greater altitudes than this and military planes have flown almost three times higher! That’s why passenger planes have pressurized cabins: ones into which heated air is steadily pumped so people can breathe properly. Military pilots avoid the problem by wearing face masks and pressurized body suits.

Helicopters

No runway, no problem—have helicopter, will travel! Igor Sikorsky (1889–1972), father of the modern chopper, had no doubt at all about the brilliance of this amazing, flying machine, which he said was the closest thing to “fulfillment of mankind’s ancient dreams of the flying horse and the magic carpet.” Jet planes are wonderful for screaming us from one side of the planet to the other. But when it comes to tricky rescue missions—plucking stranded sailors from the sea, hurling tubs of water onto forest fires, plucking engineers off wind turbines, dashing the critically injured to hospital—nothing beats a chopper. According to science historians, inventors had been trying to develop flying machines with spinning rotors for over 2000 years before Sikorsky finally built the world’s first practical helicopter in 1939. Why did it take so long? Because helicopters are incredibly complex machines—miracles of intricate engineering that take real skill to fly. How exactly do they work? Let’s take a closer look!

Photo: The US Navy’s largest helicopter: the CH53-E Sikorsky Super Stallion. Each one costs almost $25 million! Picture by Joshua Adam Nuzzo courtesy of US Navy.

How does a helicopter stay in the air?

The science of a helicopter is exactly the same as the science of an airplane: it works by generating lift—an upward-pushing force that overcomes its weight and sweeps it into the air. Planes make lift withairfoils (wings that have a curved cross-section). As they shoot forwards, their wings change the pressure and direction of the oncoming air, forcing it down behind them and powering them up into the sky: a plane’s engines speed it forward, while its wings fling it up. The big problem with a plane is that lots of air has to race across its wings to generate enough lift; that means it needs large wings, it has to fly fast, and it needs a long runway for takeoff and landing.

Four people holding the tail rotor of a US Navy helicopter

Photo: Right: Mighty rotors: You can see just how big and heavy a helicopter’s rotors are in this picture. It takes four US marines to hold this rotor in place while it’s being reattached after maintenance. Notice the curved front edge of the rotor blade that cuts like an airfoil as it spins around. Picture by Jeremy L. Grisham courtesy of US Navy.

Helicopters also make air move over airfoils to generate lift, but instead of having their airfoils in a single fixed wing, they have them built into their rotor blades, which spin around at high speed (roughly 500 RPM, revolutions per minute). The rotors are like thin wings, “running” on the spot, generating a massive downdraft of air that blows the helicopter upward. With skillful piloting, a helicopter can take off or land vertically, hover or spin on the spot, or drift gently in any direction—and you can’t do any of that in a conventional plane.

Key parts of a helicopter

A typical helicopter has thousands of intricate components, but we only need to worry about a handful of the bigger bits. The main framework is called the fuselage and it’s typically made from strong but relatively lightweight composite materials. It contains one or two engines, a transmission, and gearboxes, which power one or two main rotors and a much smaller tail rotor at the back.

Simplified helicopter cutaway showing main parts, including the engine, transmission, rotor, swash plates, and tail rotor.

Artwork: A quick summary of the essential, mechanical parts of a helicopter. Each rotor blade (1) is connected to the hub (2) and rotating mast by a feathering hinge (3), which allows it to swivel. A pitch link (a short rod) attached to each blade (4, orange) can tilt it to a steeper or shallower angle according to the position of the rotating upper swash plate (5, blue), which spins on bearings around the static lower swash plate (6, red). That’s how a chopper hovers and steers and it’s described in more detail later in this article. The two swash plates are moved up and down or tilted to the side by the pilot’s cyclic and collective cockpit controls (not shown), which are explained below. The rotor is powered by a driveshaft (7) connected to a transmission and gearbox (8, red). The same transmission powers a second, longer driveshaft (9, yellow) connected to a gearbox that spins the tail rotor (10, orange). The power from both rotors comes from one or two turboshaft jet engines (11).

Engines

One of the twin turboshaft engines on a Seahawk helicopter.

Although some small helicopters still use piston engines (also called reciprocating engines, similar to the ones used in cars and trucks), most now use gas turbines more like the jet engines on conventional airplanes. Turbine engines are smoother in operation (vibrating much less), more powerful, less mechanically complex, and more reliable. Some helicopters have a single engine mounted horizontally, underneath and just behind the rotor; most small Bell helicopters, for example, work like this. Others have one engine mounted either side of the rotor mast; military Seahawk and Apache helicopters are powered this way. Most modern choppers have turboshaft engines, which are similar to normal jet engines on airplanes. However, instead of squirting out a hot jet of exhaust gas that thrusts them forward, they use the energy from the burning gas to spin a central turbine and driveshaft that powers the transmission (the mechanism that allows the engine to power the rotors). Our main article on jet engines tells you more about how turbojet engines work.

Photo: Helicopter engine: Look under the rotor of this Seahawk helicopter. The long, gray tube between the two sets of numbers (“69”) is a turboshaft jet engine. There’s a second engine exactly the same on the other side. Photo by Trevor Kohlrus courtesy of US Navy.

Main rotor

The huge spinning rotor is the single most noticeable feature of any helicopter, but no chopper can get by with just one rotor. Why? A basic principle of physics called Newton’s third law of motion tells us that when a force (called an action) makes something move, another force, just as big (called a reaction), makes something else move in the opposite direction; action and reaction are equal and opposite is another way of putting it. As a helicopter rotor spins around (the action), the entire body of the craft tends to rotate somewhat more slowly in the opposite direction (the reaction). Left to its own devices, thistorque (turning force) would make a helicopter completely uncontrollable, so we have to counteract it in some way with what’s called counter-torque (a turning force in the opposite direction). One solution is to have a second large rotor spinning the other way. Sometimes this is mounted on the same mast as the first rotor (a design called a coaxial rotor); sometimes, as in the huge military Chinook helicopters, there’s a large rotor at either end of the craft (a design called a tandem rotor).

The counter-rotating front and rear rotors on a military Chinook helicopter.

Photo: Tandem rotor: This military Boeing CH-47 Chinook has one rotor at the front and one at the back and they spin in opposite directions to cancel one another’s torque. Photo by Tamara Vaughn courtesy of US Navy.

The blades of a helicopter’s main rotor come in three basic kinds that allow increasing amounts of movement as they spin around: they’re called rigid, semi-rigid, and fully articulated. As the name suggests, rigid blades are firmly attached to the rotor hub (the “wheel” to which the blades are fixed at the top of the spinning rotor mast) by a swiveling connection called a feathering hinge (or pitch hinge). This allows them to “feather” (swivel as they rotate, which, as we’ll discover in a moment, is how a helicopter steers). Semi-rigid blades have the same feathering hinge, but they also have ateetering hinge (or flapping hinge) that lets them flap up and down. Fully articulated blades can feather and flap, and they also have a third hinge (adrag hinge) that allows them to move slightly ahead of (“lead”) or behind (“lag”) their normal position. Each of these blade types has advantages and drawbacks.

Tail rotor

Helicopter tail rotor

Photo: The tail rotor of a Seahawk helicopter. The tail rotor is driven by a drive shaft running back from the main engines, parallel to the body of the helicopter. If you look closely, you’ll see that the blades of the rotor can be tilted by the pilot as they spin around, which generates more or less pushing force and gives the helicopter the ability to rotate on the spot as it hovers. Picture by James R. Evans courtesy of US Navy.

Apart from adding a second large rotor, another way to counteract the torque from the main rotor is by using a small, sideways-pointingpropeller called a tail rotor, powered by a driveshaft from the engine that runs through the tail end of the craft. Sometimes, for safety reasons, the tail rotor is built right inside the tail (a design called a fenestron or fan-tail). Another alternative is called a NOTAR® (“no tail rotor”), which uses a jet of air, fired through a vent on the tail, to counteract the main rotor torque instead. If a helicopter has a single main rotor blade, it has to have a tail rotor, fenestron, or NOTAR or it can’t fly safely; similarly, any damage to the tail rotor—such as a bird strike or missile hit—makes a copter dangerously uncontrollable and usually results in it crashing quite quickly afterward. Most helicopters have a vertical tail fin (pylon) that also helps to counteract some of the torque from the main rotor.

How does a helicopter hover and steer?

A helicopter’s rotors are ingenious things that allow it to hover in mid-air or steer in any direction. The pilot has five basic movement and steering controls: two hand levers called the collective and cyclic pitch, a throttle, and two foot pedals. Most maneuvers that a pilot executes involve a complex interplay between these different controls, which is why flying a helicopter requires such skill and concentration.

Hovering

As they start to spin around, the airfoils on the rotor blades generate lift that overcomes the weight of the craft, pushing it up into the air. If the lift is greater than the weight, the helicopter climbs; if it’s less than the weight, the helicopter falls. When the lift and the weight are exactly equal, the helicopter hovers in mid-air. The pilot can make the rotor blades generate more or less lift using a control called the collective pitch (or “collective”), which increases or decreases the angle (“pitch”) that all the blades make to the oncoming air as they spin around. For takeoff, the blades need to make a steep angle to generate maximum lift.

How a helicopter lifts and steers: collective and cyclic pitch compared.

How does that happen? As we’ve already seen, the main rotor is connected to the hub at the top of the mast by a feathering hinge that allows each blade to swivel as it spins, so it makes a steeper or shallower angle to the oncoming air. The blades have short vertical rods (pitch links) attached to them that are connected to a rotating metal disc called a swash plate, a bit lower down the mast. This swash plate slides on bearings around a second, similar plate directly underneath that doesn’t rotate. When the pilot moves the collective one way, both swash plates move upward, pushing up on the pitch links that tilt the rotor blades to a steeper angle. Moving the collective the other way moves the swash plates back down, pulling on the pitch links and tilting the blades to a shallower angle.

At the end of the collective, there’s a throttle connected by a cable to the engine. This is like the accelerator of a car or the throttle of a motorbike, increasing or decreasing the engine speed so the rotor makes more or less lift.

Artwork: How a helicopter hovers and steers: Top drawing: The collective pitch control changes the angle (or pitch) of each of the rotor blades by the same amount at the same time (green arrows)—in other words, collectively. If the blades make a steeper angle, they generate more lift so the entire craft moves straight upward (orange arrow). Bottom drawing: The cyclic pitch control changes the angle of selective rotor blades as they spin, so (in this case) whichever blade is on the left always produces slightly more lift, while the opposite blade (shown here on the right) always produces slightly less lift. That means more lift is produced on the left side of the helicopter, so the overall lift (orange arrow) is tilted to the right, steering the entire helicopter in that direction.

Steering

The rotors also provide the steering for a helicopter by making more lift on one side than the other. They do this by swiveling back and forth (feathering) as they rotate, so, for example, they make a steeper angle when they’re on the left side of the craft than when they’re on the right. That means they generate more lift on the left, tilting the craft over to the right and steering it in that direction. The pilot steers like this using a second lever called thecyclic pitch (also known as the “cyclic stick” or just “cyclic”), similar to a joystick, which makes the blades swivel as they cycle around. The ingenious swash plate mechanism translates the pilot’s movements into appropriate movements of the rotor blades. Suppose the pilot wants to fly to the right. First, she moves the cyclic to the right, and a system of connected levers makes the two swash plates tilt to the right as well. This makes the rotor blades tilt to a steep angle when they’re on the left and a shallow angle when they’re on the right, so the rotor produces more lift on the left hand side, steering the craft to the right.

<p”>How the tilting swash plate in a helicopter steers it from side to side.Artwork: How the swash plate steers a helicopter. In the center, you can see a simplified view of the swash plate mechanism. There are two discs at the top of the rotor mast, an upper one (red) that rotates on ball bearings (orange) around a lower one (blue) that doesn’t rotate at all. Four pitch links (green) connect the upper swash plate to the rotor blades. Now suppose you want to fly to the right. You tilt the cyclic in that direction. That tilts both swash plates over to the right. As the rotor blades rotate, the tilted swash plates force the pitch links up when they’re on the left and down when they’re on the right. That makes each rotor blade tilt to a steeper angle when it’s on the left and a shallower angle when it’s on the right. This produces more lift on the left, steering the chopper to the right.

The pilot can also steer the nose of a helicopter in a certain direction using a pair of foot controls, known asantitorque pedals, which change the pitch of the tail rotor blades so they make more or less sideways thrust than in normal straight flight. That makes the entire craft rotate slowly clockwise or counterclockwise so it heads in a different direction. On tandem rotor helicopters like the Chinook, which have no tail rotor, the foot pedals tilt the swashplates for the front and back rotors in opposite ways, steering the craft accordingly.

</p”>

How helicopter rotors work

Everyone knows a helicopter’s rotors rotate (that’s why they’re called rotors). But the really clever thing about them is that the blades can swivel back and forth as they turn around—and that requires some amazingly intricate machinery.

It’s easy to mimic a helicopter with your arms and your body’s hidden structure makes the movements seem easy. Stand up with your arms outstretched horizontally. Rotate your whole body slowly on the spot. As you’re turning around, swivel your arms at the shoulders. That’s roughly what a helicopter does with its blades, except that it does it about 3–4 times each second as the blades are spinning round! Here are the main bits that make it work:

The main parts of a helicopter rotor and the engine that powers it

  1. The blades are shaped like airfoils (airplane wings with a curved profile) so they generate lift as they spin.
  2. Each blade can swivel about a feathering hinge as it spins.
  3. Vertical pitch links push the blades up and down, making them swivel as they rotate. The pitch links move up and down according to the angle of the swash plates.
  4. The rotor mast (a central axle connected to the engine by the transmission) makes the entire blade assembly rotate.
  5. The rotor hub cap (above the rotors) helps to reduce aerodynamic drag.
  6. There are two turbo-shaft jet engines, one on either side of the rotors. If one engine fails, there should still be enough power from the other engine to land the helicopter safely.

Photo: Top: A US Navy engineer checks the rotor assembly on a Seahawk helicopter. Picture by Kathaleen A. Knowles courtesy of US Navy with annotations by Explain that Stuff. Bottom: An engineer repairs the amazingly intricate and complex rotor mechanism of a Seahawk, viewed here from directly above. The engines are the two open cones on either side. You can also see two of the rotor blades folded back along the fuselage (and pointing upward in this picture), which means the Seahawk can be parked on aircraft carriers in much less space. Photo by Oliver Cole courtesy of US Navy.

Seahawk helicopter rotor seen from above

How Sikorsky designed the modern helicopter rotor

All this sounds ingenious—and it is! The person who made it possible was brilliant Russian-born inventor Igor Sikorsky. Here are two of his original helicopter design drawings, taken from the patent for a Direct Lift Aircraft (helicopter) he filed in June 1931:

Igor Sikorsky helicopter patent US#1,994,488 filed June 27, 1931 showing details of the rotor blade mechanism.

Notice how similar the mechanism is to what we find on a modern helicopter? The patent is extremely detailed and quite complex (you can check it out for yourself), so I’ve removed most of the labels and numbers and highlighted just a few key features:

  1. There’s an aileron at the end of each rotor blade, shown in orange.
  2. The ailerons can be tilted (as they rotate) by the blue rods.
  3. There are two main rotor blades (which Sikorsky referred to collectively as the “lift propeller.”
  4. The entire rotor blades can swivel on the green rods and can also be tilted as they rotate.
  5. The main rotor blade rotates around a central hub (yellow) with an engine beneath it.
  6. A single engine powers both the main rotor blade and the tail rotor. One of Sikorsky’s key innovations was to produce a helicopter that needed only one main rotor blade, with a tail rotor to balance it, for reasons discussed below. As Sikorsky noted in his patent, having only one rotor means a helicopter is “light in weight, simple to construct, and cheap to produce”—three powerful advantages over earlier designs!

Artwork: Igor Sikorsky’s original patent drawings, with colors and annotations added for clarity. From US Patent #1,994,488: Direct Lift Aircraft, courtesy of US Patent and Trademark Office.

Advantages and disadvantages of helicopters

Harrier with swiveling engine nozzle labeled

Choppers have lots of advantages over planes. You don’t need a runway, for starters, or big wings, and you can operate helicopters more easily from ships. From the center of a city to the middle of a jungle, you can take off or land more or less anywhere. You can pause, mid-flight, to rescue someone, pick up a load, or drop it off with a winch. Admittedly, you can’t usually fly as fast or as far as a plane, or carry as many people or as much cargo, but you have much more flexibility in where you can go.

Photo: Alternatives to a helicopter#1: Vertical/Short Takeoff and Landing (V/STOL) aircraft, like the famous Harrier, shown here, try to combine the maneuverability of a helicopter with the speed of a plane. A Harrier can hover because, unlike a traditional jet engine, it has four extra nozzles on the side that can swivel around to direct the engine’s exhaust gases straight downward. Picture by Staci Bitzer courtesy of US Navy.

Unfortunately, this versatility comes at a price: helicopters with spinning rotors are mechanically more complex than planes with static wings, more prone to failure, need more maintenance, and are expensive to operate. Since you can fly a helicopter in all kinds of ways—it’s effectively several different flying craft all rolled into one—you might think piloting a chopper is automatically harder than flying a plane. But there’s no real comparison, because they’re two totally different things.

Three views of an osprey tilt rotor helicopter: flying forwards, coming in to land, and with rotors folded.

Photos: Alternatives to a helicopter#2: Bell Boeing’s V-22 Osprey has huge rotors at the front that can be tilted to point upward (like a helicopter) or forward (like a plane), combining the advantages of both in a single aircraft. Photos (left to right) by Andy M. Kin, Oscar Espinoza, and Zachary L. Borden, all courtesy of US Navy.

A brief history of helicopters

  • 400BCE: A Chinese book reveals how to make a “flying top” helicopter toy using spinning feathers attached to the end of a stick. You spin the stick quickly between your hands, hurl it into the air, and the feathers make it fly.
  • 1483: Italian inventor Leonardo da Vinci (1452–1519) designs a helicopter with corkscrew-shaped propeller blades to pull it up through the air. He doesn’t build it, however.
  • 1754: Russian engineer Mikhail Lomonosov (1711–1765) builds a small working model showing how a gear mechanism can drive a pair of coaxial, counter-rotating helicopter blades.
  • 1796: British aircraft pioneer Sir George Cayley (1773–1857) builds spring- and elastic-powered models of helicopters that fly to impressive heights (tens of meters). Later, in 1843, he sketches plans for a full-scale helicopter with two rotors, but the steam engines available at that time are much too heavy to power it.
  • 1880s: American inventor genius Thomas Edison (1847–1931) experiments with model helicopters, including some driven by electricity, his favorite source of power.
  • 1901: Igor Sikorsky (1889–1972), a Russian aircraft engineer, builds himself a working model helicopter powered by a rubber band. It’s the beginning of a life’s obsession with helicopters—one that will change the world.
  • 1904: Frenchman Charles Richet (1850–1935) builds a small helicopter, but it doesn’t carry a pilot.
  • 1907. Frenchman Louis Breguet (1880–1955), a student of Charles Richet, and his brother build a quadrotor helicopter (the Breguet-Richet gyroplane) with a rotor at each corner. It can fly about a meter off the ground for a minute or so at a time. Later the same year, another Frenchman, Paul Cornu (1881-1944), builds a small helicopter that can lift off for about 20 seconds.
  • 1916: Austrian aerodynamic genius Theodore von Kármán (1881–1963) helps to design a helicopter called the Petróczy, Kármán and Žurovec-1 (PKZ-1), driven by an electric motor, that proves powerful enough to lift three men.
  • 1920: Spaniard Juan de la Cierva (1895–1936) invents the autogyro, a small, flying airplane with a rotor on top.
  • 1931: After many years of experimenting, Igor Sikorsky designs and patents a practical, working helicopter. He finally builds and flies a version of it, the VS-300, in 1939.
  • 1942: Sikorsky’s R-4 becomes the world’s first mass-produced helicopter.
  • 1950–1953: Helicopters demonstrate their true military potential for the first time during the Korean War.
  • 1951: Charles Kaman builds the K-225, the first gas-turbine engined helicopter. Three years later, he builds the first twin-turbine helicopter, the HTK-1, for the US Navy.
  • 1961: Boeing’s fast, cargo-carrying tandem rotor CH-47 Chinook helicopter makes its maiden flight (entering production the following year). It can manage loads of up to 10 tonnes.
  • 1964: Frenchman Paul Fabre of Sud Aviation develops the fenestron.
  • 1967: Two Sikorsky S-61R helicopters make the first ever non-stop, transatlantic flight from New York City to Paris, France in a time of 30 hours 46 minutes.
  • 1981: NOTAR® (no tail rotor) is tested for the first time on a Hughes OH-6A helicopter.
  • 1988: Bell-Boeing begins production of its V-22 Osprey, a tilt-rotor aircraft that can take off like a helicopter but fly like a plane.
  • 1989: The McDonald Douglas 520N, the first mass-produced NOTAR® helicopter, makes its maiden flight on December 28, 1989.