Chaos Theory

tropical viruses
Search BBC News

Online
GO
Advanced search options
Medical workers at the 1995 former Zaire outbreak
Theories on the origins of the 30 or more new diseases to

affect humans over the past two decades are widespread,
but many of the most frightening appear to have emerged
from sub-Saharan Africa.
HIV, which leads to Aids, has been linked to a similar virus
common in West African monkeys, and the first ever
recorded HIV sample was taken from a man in what is now
the Democratic Republic of Congo in 1959.
Ebola and a few other haemorrhagic fevers have been
responsible for a tiny number of deaths compared to Aids,
and the number of cases reported outside Africa has been
miniscule.
But the devastating speed at which they strike, and the far
higher possibility of transmission from human to human
have made the thought of a major outbreak a terrifying
prospect.
BBC RADIO NEWS
BBC ONE TV NEWS
WORLD NEWS
SUMMARY
BBC NEWS 24
BULLETIN
PROGRAMMES GUIDE
See also:
05 Aug 99 | Health
Ebola cure hope

15 Jan 99 | Africa
Fighting back at ebola

14 May 99 | Health
Flu symptoms at first

Scientists first became aware of the potential of Ebola to
destroy whole communities in the mid 1970s, when severe
outbreaks in Sudan and the former Zaire killed a total of
approximately 440 people.
The Zaire strain of the virus is the most deadly to date,
proving fatal in just under 90% of those who contracted.
The virus can be passed on either via dirty needles, or by
person to person spread, and symptoms start to appear
anytime from a few days later, up to almost a fortnight.
Ebola-like virus under control

06 Aug 99 | Health
Ebola ruled out as man dies

Internet links:
Ebola information
New and emerging infections:
Ebola
The BBC is not responsible for
the content of external internet
sites
By then, the virus will have

reproduced itself many times and
spread through the blood to many
organs.
The major organs it affects are the
liver, kidneys, spleen and
reproductive organs.
Very often, flu-like symptoms such
as a sore throat, headache and
high temperature are the first sign
of infection.
Quarantined children during

the 1995 outbreak
This is followed by nausea, vomiting and diarrhoea.

The victim may start to become delirious and dehydrated.
They can begin to bleed internally, either from the major
organs themselves or from tiny blood vessels, the digestive
tract and gums.
Eventually, this can cause enough blood loss to cause
shock and respiratory problems, leading quickly in many
cases to death.
Treatment eludes doctors
There is still no treatment for Ebola readily available - no
standard anti-viral therapies such as interferon have any
effect. If someone beats Ebola they do it by themselves.
After the initial Sudan and former Zaire outbreaks, there
was another small outbreak in Sudan in 1979.
But it was not until 1995 - again the former Zaire, that a
major outbreak occurred, centred around the town of
Kikwit.
This time 316 people were infected - almost exactly the
same number as the first Zaire outbreak, and 245 died.
The menace of Marburg
But Ebola is not the only viral haemorrhagic fever which
claims lives in Africa, and beyond.
Marburg fever gets its name from the town in Germany in
which it broke out in 1967 and shares its symptoms with
Ebola.
It claimed seven lives from the 25 infected in Marburg and
Frankfurt.
The disease was transmitted from African green monkeys
brought to Germany for animal experimentation.
Other well-known haemorrhagic fevers are:
Lassa fever - first noticed in the 1960s after an

outbreak in Nigeria, and is spread from rodents, the
natural host
Rift Valley fever - mainly found in sub-Saharan
Africa, and spread by mosquitoes
Congo-Crimean haemorrhagic fever - found in many
parts of Africa, the Middle East and even warmer
parts of the former Soviet Union, in which an
outbreak is ongoing. It is spread by ticks
Treatments in pipeline
Scientists have developed vaccinations against both Ebola
and Marburg which work on laboratory animals, and there
are promising signs of some therapies that can be used on
victims.
Some experiments use antibodies
from the marrow of Ebola
survivors.
Much of the scientific work
underway is focused on finding the
original source of the disease - the
reservoir.
One project examined thousands
of animals in the rainforests of
West Africa in a bid to isolate those
hosting the virus.
Garcini Kola, a west African

plant which may kill Ebola
Some scientists say that the growing number of so-called

emerging diseases are due to increasing forays by humans
into the tropical forests.
This brings them into contact with new creatures - and new
infections - making it possible there could be even more
powerful viruses waiting to play havoc in the human body.
Sexually transmitted diseases
Search BBC News Online

GO
Advanced search options
BBC RADIO NEWS

Sexually transmitted diseases are on the increase
There has been a big increase in sexually transmitted

diseases. BBC News Online provides details of the
most common forms.
Gonorrhoea:
Gonorrhoea is a serious illness caused by an organism
called Neisseria gonorrhoeae.
BBC ONE TV NEWS
WORLD NEWS
SUMMARY
BBC NEWS 24
BULLETIN
It has an incubation period of only a few days.

PROGRAMMES GUIDE
Males experience a discharge from the urethra causing

painful urination, while females suffer infection of the
urethra and cervix.
Women who are infected have a long term risk of serious
complications, such as infertility or ectopic pregnancy.
However, it is possible to be infected with gonorrhoea
without showing any obvious symptoms.
Women are particularly vulnerable to this asymptomatic
form of the disease.
Chlamydia:
Chlamydia is caused by the bacteria chlamydia
trachomatis.
Much chlamydial infection goes undiagnosed, because the
infection is often without symptoms.
See also:
15 Dec 00 | Health
Young should abstain from

sex
24 Mar 00 | Health
Sex disease cases rise

07 Dec 00 | Health
Sex diseases on the increase

20 Sep 00 | Health
Sex disease checks - by post

Internet links:
Public Health Laboratory
Service
Sexual Health Information
Center
Sexually transmitted diseases
The BBC is not responsible for
the content of external internet
sites
However, the long term complications can be severe,

especially for women where it can lead to pelvic
inflammatory disease, ectopic pregnancy and infertility.
The Public Health Laboratory Service is developing new
diagnostic and screening methods which should help to
ensure that more cases are diagnosed and treated before
the long-term effects occur.
Genital Warts:
Genital warts (also known as venereal warts) are caused
by a virus, the human papillomavirus (HPV).
Warts are found on or around the penis, anus or vagina.
They are small lumps which have an irregular cauliflowerlike surface.
The colour and shape vary depending on their location.
Sometimes the warts cause irritation and itching.

Genital warts are a serious health concern as certain types
of HPV have been associated with cervical cancer.
However, most women infected with genital warts do not
have the strains of HPV that give rise to cervical cancer.
Syphilis:
Syphilis is caused by the bacteria T. pallidum.
The incubation period is from a few days to three months.
The symptoms of syphilis are less specific. Though the
illness usually begins with one or more painless but highly
infectious sores appearing anywhere on the body (but
usually at the site of infection) this is not always the case.
These sores clear up on their own in two to six weeks.
Later symptoms are highly variable and anyone who thinks
they are at risk from unsafe sex by them or their partner
should seek screening and treatment at an GUM clinic.
The infection can be cured by antibiotics. However, if the
disease is left untreated, it can eventually affect the brain
or heart, and lead to death.
The condition is especially significant in women in
pregnancy where infection can cause miscarriage, still
birth, or a damaged baby.
, AIP, 2001
(CMB),

,
, ,
.
CMB ,
.
CMB, ,

, , ,
.
CMB,

CMB.
. , 1
( ), o
CMB (
400.000 Big Bang).
,
,
, ..
Boomerang,
, ,
, 1
,
. Boomerang, , Maxima,
, .
30 2001,
(APS) , Degree Angular Scale
Interferometer (DASI),
( NSF), .
DASI
Boomerang . Boomerang
14 .
,
. ,
( ,
(),
). Boomerang DASI 1.03 1.04, ,
6%. ,

( ). 5%
,
big bang .
,
(
).
CMB 30% 65%, ,
.
Maxima,
, .
,
.
ichael Turner ,
,

. , Turner,

(CMB).
Reuter 8--2001

20 ,
NASA Daniel
Goldin,

.

, Goldin 40 .

,
,

,

.
NASA

lander
2007,

2009 2011
, ,

.
10 -- ,
10 -- 20 ,
,
Goldin George Washington.
Goldin NASA ,
.
, ,
.
NASAJet Propulsion,
, MarsYard,
.

: , .
,
,

.
,
, .

(=, , , )
Mandelbrot
.

.
- -
. ,

.
,
:

, .
.
. .
.
(
, ). ,
,
.
.
, , ,
,

.
1970
. , , ,
.

. .
. .
- computer.
.

, .
.
.
, .
.

, --

.
.
,
, ,
:

,
.
.
,
. ,
8

(strange attractr).
,

- -,

Dr. Matthew A.
Trump
Ilya Prigogine Austin Texas,

.
, ,
.

.
.

.

. ,

,
.
100 ,

.
.
( .

.
(
.

,
.
(
.
( ,

.
(
..
in Superstrings, cosmology, composite structures, eds. S.J. Gates, Jr. and R.N.
Mohapatra, Proc. of Maryland Workshop, March 11-18, 1987 (World Scientific,
Singapore, 1987) 585-593.
Universally of Marineland Alimentary Gastronomy Universe of Murray

Gell-Mann Elementary My Dear Watson Unified Theory of My
Elementary Pa
SUPER G-STRING FIELD THEORY*

V. Gates, Empty Kangaroo, M. Roachcock, and W.C. Gall
Compartment of Physiques and Astrology
Universally of Marineland, Car Park, MD
ABSTRACT
In conclusion, this is a major new paper by the pioneers in the field, so youre going
to have to read the rest of the paper whether you understand it or not, or at least
convince other people that you did by memorizing all the catch phrases. If youre a
faculty member, just get one of your students to read it for you. If you dont have any
students, probably nobody talks to you anyway, so forget it. If you are a student, good
luck.
*Work not supported. In fact, they told us specifically not to do it.
Uniformity of Modern Elementary Particle Physics Unintelligibility of

Many Elementary Particle Physicists Universal City of Movieland
Alimony Pa
Nonabel was I ere I saw Lebanon --- Yang and Mills

The best things in life are interacting --- T Ching
Science is golden --- Phenomanon.
1. INTRODUCTION
All science other than string theory is garbage\ref{1}. Since string field theory is
becoming more and more a part of everyday life (so far, no disagreement has been
found with experiment\ref{2}), we here apply this formalism to the most important
string, the super G\ref{2}-string\ref{3}. (See also\ref{4}.) Strings also provide the
only known theories of quantum gravity which are too complicated to prove wrong,
and therefore provide a convenient method of turning up our noses at all the ordinary
particle theorists who havent even learned general relativity yet. (Besides, if they
havent learned strings, they can only be phenomenologists anyway. This includes
anybody who still calls strings dual models.) The super G-string can also be used to
10
derive models of GUTS\ref{5} cosmetology (gastronomy), through the use of string

solitons known as comic strings\ref{6}, due to their comic proportions. This string
may even solve problems in the conceptual development of the statistical
interpretation of quantum mec$\hbar$anics, such as the famous Witten kitten
paradox\ref{7}. Strings were originally developed for use in QCD, whatever that was.
\reversemarginpar\marginpar{\sc \noindent doz.\ eggs\\ milk\\ bread\\ oranges} As
usual\ref{3,8}, we begin by setting up some notational conventions (since nobody
ever invites us to any other kind). We use Roman indices for vectors and Greek
indices for spinors, except on Thursdays, when we do the opposite. This notation is
unambiguous, since we use index-free notation anyway, which means you have to
guess what all the indices are. Sometimes we also use symbol-free notation, so you
also have to guess whether there is an equation there at all.
\pictureb The paper is organized as follows: In the title we tell you what the paper is
about. Since thats a lie, in the abstract we tell you what the paper is {\it really} about.
Thats also a lie, but we need more space to fully exaggerate our claims. Since most
of the people who actually read these papers come from institutions so small that their
theory group is abelian, they wont know the difference anyway. In the introduction
we tell you what we did in the past, carefully referencing all the people who did
unrelated work, while giving only backhanded references to anybodys papers that
might be more interesting than ours (or at least ones that make even more exaggerated
claims). We also tell you there about our (disregard for) conventions, and how the
paper is organized, and we tell you how we tell you how the paper is organized, etc.
In the following section, we test you to see if youre still awake. In section 3, we
discuss the things we really dont care about, but which boring people keep asking us
about anyway. In particular, we describe methods which avoid using the functionals
needed in string field theory, for those of you who are functional illiterates. In the
next section we explain BRST, which by now is so well understood that the only thing
people dont understand is what the T stands for. In section 5 we discuss the real
world, and prove that it exists. (We also sketch a proof that Green and Schwarz are
not the same person.) Section 6 is a disclaimer, put in just to reference the work of
people who are so important that we are embarassed to tell them how worthless their
recent work is, and to avoid the whole problem by saying that we really dont
understand their work yet, even though its so trivial that even our chauffeur knows
its wrong. We also have a note added in proof, acknowledging the work of the
referee. Finally, we have the acknowledgments, as if we didnt know that we dont
really owe anybody anything (except maybe our bookies).
\picturec
2. NEW STRING FIELD* THEORY

In this section we further develop the NEW (Not Ed Witten) string field
theory\ref{9}, which is necessary to formulate the super G-string in a way which
nobody but us can understand. (This allows us to publish many papers before anybody
else, since they have to spend most of their time figuring out our notation.) Our NEW
vertex is
\setlength{\unitlength}{1mm} \begin{picture}(140,70) \put(20,10){\line(1,0){90}}
\put(20,20){\line(1,0){100}} \put(20,30){\line(1,0){90}} \put(20,40){\line(1,0){80}}
\put(20,50){\line(1,0){90}} \put(20,60){\line(1,0){100}}
\put(100,30){\line(0,1){10}} \put(110,30){\line(0,1){20}}
11
\put(120,20){\line(0,1){40}} \put(100,40){\line(1,1){10}}
\put(110,10){\line(1,1){10}} \put(20,15){\oval(8,10)} \put(20,35){\oval(8,10)}
\put(20,55){\oval(8,10)} \end{picture}
\begin{center} \marginpar{\sc check associativity}
Fig. 1. The interacting G-string 3-point vertex \end{center}
Notice that on the right-hand side of the figure there is only a free string propagator,
while on the left-hand side are 3 strings, into which the propagator is continuously
transformed, without introducing any curvature into the surface. Thus the interacting
G-string follows directly from the free theory. (There have been claims that this
vertex is just an optical illusion. However, the same has been said about the success of
string theory in general.)
*Technically speaking, the term string field is self-contradictory, since, as we all
know, strings dont grow in fields, they grow in vineyards.
3. PATH-INTEGRAL METHODS
Path-integral methods are very convenient for evaluating graphs derived from string
field theory, since they allow us to use the transformations on the 2-dimensional bullsheet resulting from general coordinate and local Weyl scale transformations, also
known as stretching it. We discovered this in \ref{10}. (Everybody else discovered
this much earlier\ref{11}, but we dont recognize them*.) In particular, these graphs
can easily be evaluated by mapping to the upper-half plane:
*\go IN FACT, WE DONT EVEN GO TO THE SAME CONFERENCES THEY
GO TO. OOPS! I GUESS IT WASNT SUCH A GOOD IDEA TO DO THE
FOOTNOTE IN GOTHIC. WELL, SINCE THIS IS SO HARD TO READ, WELL
PUT ALL OUR IMPORTANT RESULTS HERE, SO WE CAN REFERENCE
THEM IN A LATER PAPER. THIS WAY, PEOPLE WONT NOTICE THE
RESULTS UNTIL WE POINT THEM OUT, SINCE THEYRE TOO HARD TO
READ, BECAUSE MOST OF THE GOTHS ARE ALREADY DEAD, OR AT
LEAST NOT DOING PHYSICS. THE RESULTS ARE: WIURW NVWE WE
VWIJR, IJWER WEIWI WEI J INWR IJNNWR. JNWER IWEJNR WERN IJWER
WRG JWNR IJW: JN WRN IWJEROIQEOEJWO WEJNN JOR SCHR{\rm\{\go
O}}DINGER EQUATION WER ER ER G WTJNW JE ROJE WN IJWN!**
**If you cant read the previous footnote, dont worry. Even if you could read it, you
probably couldnt understand it, and even if you could understand it, it wouldnt help
you understand the rest of the paper, which you probably wont understand anyway.
Sometimes we dont know why we even bother to write papers at all. Well, besides
the money.***
***Actually, the money isnt all that great either. At least not for the paper itself.
However, the residuals tend to make up for it. For example, if you would like to see
any of our calculations, in notation which is not symbol-free, it will be very symbolexpensive. Be sure to send all your requests with a self-addressed envelope, and
include a check for $10 per equation, plus $5 shipping and handling. No refunds.
Address your letter to: Money B. Green, Haharishi Intergalactic Institute, Plantville,
Iowa 12345.****
12
****This footnote is much too small to read, so dont even bother.

Besides, it doesnt say anything anyway: tunghurwtngh wtung rwnt
rwugn brwun bnrgw bnrrwt gbur tbnreutngoie gwurt hwgqwuisjfd jsin
ghwjnt uieq gijn sbij wib ib bin buintiubn iutn jnrt bijr binr tbn ipjn
wgrbn ug nbisgibu irewuthgi biusd fbiunw tiub sdibn sijdgfb iwt bi
gfbijn dgfijb sjdfnb irt bi dfgibijdfnbgjid fgiibnd hb.
\pictured
\picturee \begin{picture}(140,212) \put(140,156){\line(-1,5){11.2}}
\put(140,156){\line(-2,5){22.4}} \put(140,156){\line(-2,3){37.3}}
\put(140,156){\line(-1,1){56}} \put(140,156){\line(-3,2){84}} \put(140,156){\line(5,2){140}} \put(140,156){\line(-5,1){140}} \put(140,156){\line(-1,0){140}}
\put(140,156){\line(-1,-5){11.2}} \put(140,156){\line(-2,-5){22.4}}
\put(140,156){\line(-2,-3){37.3}} \put(140,156){\line(-1,-1){56}}
\put(140,156){\line(-3,-2){84}} \put(140,156){\line(-5,-2){140}}
\put(140,156){\line(-5,-1){140}} \put(0,100){\line(1,0){140}}
\put(0,100){\line(0,1){112}} \put(140,212){\line(-1,0){140}} \put(140,212){\line(0,1){112}} \put(70,90){\vector(0,-1){20}} \put(140,60){\line(-1,0){140}}
\put(140,60){\line(-6,-1){120}} \put(140,60){\line(-3,-1){105}} \put(140,60){\line(4,-3){80}} \put(20,0){\line(2,1){26.7}} \put(20,0){\line(0,1){40}}
\put(20,0){\line(3,5){15}} \put(0,60){\line(1,-1){20}} \put(60,0){\line(-1,1){25}}
\end{picture}
Fig. 2. Map to the upper-half plane

However, in most cases such methods turn out to be just a lot of pointless
geometry\ref{12}. Furthermore, this approach relies on doing first quantization,
while, as everyone knows, its always easier to do classical first, and second
quantization. Nevertheless, these geometric methods have the double advantage of
allowing the use of deep mathematical theorems that most physicists never even heard
of, much less understand, so that we can simultaneously use old math that physicists
were never aware of and old physics that mathematicians were never aware of, and
thus excite everybody about something which was invented by somebody whos long
since dead. In this way, the beauty of string theory is made very similar to that of
classical music, as suggested by the term G-string (although we had a different type
of beauty in mind when we invented the term).
\picturef
4. BRST
Field theory formulations can be straightforwardly derived by the use of
BRST\ref{13} methods. For these purposes it is convenient to expand around flat
space, so we first consider the G$\flat$-string. These methods can be used to prove
that the G-string has 12 sets of auxiliary fields\ref{14l}. The geometry of the field
theory described by Fig. 1 is necessarily commutative, since the geometry of a closed
string is a ring, and only commutative rings are fields. The gauge transformations of
the BRST formulation, known as cordal transformations\ref{15}, change the
geometry of the string so as to produce ropes, or cords:
\setlength{\unitlength}{1mm} \begin{picture}(140,50) \put(60,2){$\kbl$}
\put(60,4){$\kcl$} \put(60,6){$\kcl$} \put(60,8){$\kcl$} \put(60,10){$\kcl$}
13

\put(60,43){$\ktl$} \put(80,2){$\kbr$} \put(80,4){$\kcr$} \put(80,6){$\kcr$}
\put(80,8){$\kcr$} \put(80,10){$\kcr$} \put(80,12){$\kcr$} \put(80,14){$\kcr$}
\put(80,40){$\kcr$} \put(80,42){$\kcr$} \put(80,43){$\ktr$} \end{picture}
Fig. 3. Left- and right-handed cordal transformations
5. PHENOMEKNOWLEDGE
As for all high-energy physics, all string physics (not to be confused with the oldfashioned topic of particle physics) can be classified into two types: (1) esthetic and
(2) anesthetic. The former type has the advantage that, when it is found that either
nature disagrees with it or it is too complicated for anyone to know if they agree with
it, it can still be published in a science fiction magazine or the science section of a
formerly reputable newspaper. The latter type has the advantage that seminars on it
give needed rest to the many overworked physicists who have spent many sleepless
nights puzzling over theories of the former type. Since most of this paper has so far
been devoted to type-1 physics, we now digress to type-2 as a respite. For those who
dont wish to skip this section, we suggest you now place your index finger on the
heading of the following section, to avoid the usual vicious circle of rereading the
paragraph upon awakening which had been forgotten due to loss of memory in the
pre-catatonic state.
As discussed previously\ref{3}, Kalvin-Klein compactification of the G-string to 4
dimensions can be obtained by giving appropiate $\s$-dependence to the vector index
on the spacetime coordinate $x \sp {\m ( \s )}$. One observable consequence of this
phenomenon is the appearance of extremely miniscule particles\ref{16} emitted by
the compactified dimensions. Supersymmetry is preserved by the SU(3) holomoney
(with flavors $\rm\rlap/c$, \$ , \pounds ), whose cohomology has a topology with
good phenomenology. One useful method to study this behavior is the introduction of
massless background fields, in terms of which an effective action is studied \ref{17}.
This allows us to ignore all the fields which make string theory different from
ordinary supergravity in the first place, and which we really didnt want to have to
learn about anyway.
6. COVARIANTIZING THE LIGHT CONE

All these results can be derived from a very general formalism which encompasses
particle physics as well as string physics. The derivation of this formalism begins with
the description of the string in the light-cone gauge\ref{18}. This formalism is closely
related to the Paris-is-sewerless formalism, in which the anticommuting coordinates
become the Phantoms of the Operators.
\pictureg
Note added in proof
14
After this work was completed, we became aware that similar results (including
typographical errors) had been obtained in\ref{19}. However, we have given much
neater proofs of the theorems appearing there by ignoring all the important steps.
Also, we have included some results which were omitted from the published version
of\ref{19} due to their being incorrect (see also\ref{20}).
\pictureh
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank God its Friday, for helpful discussions, and for
making\ref{21} available before publication. (He also informed us that He was
independently aware of many of the results obtained here.) Also, we have a lot of
friends who have done nothing worthwhile whatsoever on this topic, which makes us
feel sorry for them. After all, they used to do pretty important stuff way back during
the Middle Ages (i.e., in the era after the Classical Era of dual models and before the
Modern Era of superstrings). So we thank them for many useful conversations, mostly
on the weather and mutual funds\ref{22}. Finally, we acknowledge several people for
correcting sign errors and factors of 2 in an earlier version of this paper, and ask them
to mind their own damn business from now on.
References
[1]
Ka\v c, V., K\ahler, A., Kaku, M., and Kallosh, R., The Ka\sll u\.za-Klein Klan
Jumps on the Rubber-Bandwagon, Katmandu preprint (Feb. 1985).
[2]
Ginsparg, P. and Glashow, S., Phys. Today 39, no. 5 (1986) 7;
A. Skepti\c, On the Feasibility of Experimental Verification of Pain Factors in CliffJumping Theory, Aspen preprint.
[3]
Gates, V., Kangaroo, E., Roachcock, M., and Gall, W.C., The Super G-string,
Unified String Theories, eds. Green, M. and Gross, D., Proc. of Santa Barbarbara
Workshop, Jul. 29 - Aug. 16, 1985 (World Scientific, Singapore, 1986) 729.
[4]
Deser, S., Pirani, F.A.E., and Robinson, D.C., Embedding the G-String, Kings
College preprint (Mar. 1976), almost appeared in Phys. Rev. D14, 3301 (1976).
[5]
Penney, J.C. and Salam, Alekum, Aprons, Borons, Caissons, Canyons, Falcons,
Icons, Morons, Peons, Rayons, and Raisins, ICBM preprint (Feb. 1974);
Kenny Lane, Technicolor in Your Ears and in Your Eyes (and Other Places),
OSU(5) preprint.
[6]
Mike and Tina Turner, Whats Physics Got to Do with It?, Skyrmelab preprint.
[7]
Schr\odinger, E., How to Kill Ka\v c in a Quantum Mechanical Roach Motel
without Using d/dt, Copenhagen preprint, probably not to appear.
15
[8]
Gates, V., Kangaroo, E., Roachcock, M., and Gall, W.C., Stuperspace, Physica
15D, 289-293 (1985).
[9]
Gates, V., Kangaroo, E., Roachcock, M., and Gall, W.C., A NEW String Field
Theory, to appear in NEWcular Physiques Bee, unless we get that same stupid
referee again.
[10]
Kangaroo, E. and Van de Supergraaf, The., Divergences in 2D Frutti
$\s$uper$\s$ymmetric $\s$-Models at One More Loop than Our Last Paper,
Donnybrook preprint (Mar. 1986).
[11]
Dan Freed, Dan Friedan, Dan Freedman, and Dan Zanon, Proc. of Mexico City
Conference, Mexico, D.F., July 1986.
[12]
Witten, E., Nucl. Phys. B268, 253 (1986);
L. Geoconda, A New String Theory Based on Keplerian Polyhedral Dynamics.
[13]
Becchi, C., Rouet, A., Stora, R., and T, Mr., \PL52B, 344 (1974);
Jonathan $\dag$ and Iso Bars, $\hbar$s and Graded Cheese Algebars in the GrinchWarts Superstring, Neveu Demento A1, 332 (1984);
W. Siegheil and Parton Wetback, Enough BRST to Make You Want to Die, Proc.
of Hanna-Barbera Workshop, to appear (Universe Scientific, Phnom Penh, 1987).
[14]
[a]
Almost Never and Pete Best, Auxiliary Fields for the G-String, CERN preprint
85-01 (Jan. 1985);
[b]
The G-String Has 2 Sets of Auxiliary Fields, CERN preprint 85-02 (Feb. 1985);
[c]
The G-string Has 3 Sets of Auxiliary Fields, CERN preprint 85-03 (Mar. 1985);
[d]
The G-String Has 4 Sets of Auxiliary Fields, CERN preprint 85-04 (Apr. 1985);
[e]
The G-String Has 5 Sets of Auxiliary Fields, CERN preprint 85-05 (May 1985);
[f]
The G-String Has 6 Sets of Auxiliary Fields, CERN preprint 85-06 (Jun. 1985);
[g]
The G-String Has 7 Sets of Auxiliary Fields, CERN preprint 85-07 (Jul. 1985);
16
[h]
The G-String Has 8 Sets of Auxiliary Fields, CERN preprint 85-08 (Aug. 1985);
[i]
The G-String Has 9 Sets of Auxiliary Fields, CERN preprint 85-09 (Sep. 1985);
[j]
The G-String Has 10 Sets of Auxiliary Fields, CERN preprint 85-10 (Oct. 1985);
[k]
The G-String Has 11 Sets of Auxiliary Fields, CERN preprint 85-11 (Nov.
1985);
[l]
The G-String Has 12 Sets of Auxiliary Fields, CERN preprint 85-12 (Dec.
1985).
[15]
Banks, T. and Peskin, M.E., Nucl. Phys. B264, 513 (1986).
[16]
Veltman, M., Production of Tini-Wini from Intermediate Vector Boson Decay in
Supersymmetric Theories, Michigan preprint.
[17]
Miguelito Lovelace and James West, Background Field Theory, Rutgers the State
University preprint;
Burt Offering, 16+10 Supergravity, PU preprint.
[18]
Goldarn, P., Gallstone, J., Rabbi, C., and Thoron, C., New Clear Physics B123,
1974 (1974).
[19]
Archimedes, Super G-String Field Theory, Athens preprint ($\D\e\c$., 3rd yr. of
the 7th Olympiad).
[20]
Gervais, J.L. and Neveu, A., Nucl. Phys. B47, 422 (1972).
[21]
God, $\aleph$., The Bible, Testament III, Jerusalem preprint (Tish.
MMMMMDCCXLVI), to appear atop a mount.
[22]
All our friends (until now), Conversation of Energy: $\pa \f / \pa k$, private
gossip.
\picturei $$\face$$
The Sudbury Neutrino Observatory - Canadas eye on the universe
Some 2000 metres underground in a working nickel mine, physicists have
installed one of the worlds most sensitive instruments for observing the
universe. Operational since 1999, the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory has
ambitious plans for the future. James Gillies reports.
17
sign
SNO cavity
It all began 1.8 billion years ago when geologists believe that a meteorite struck the
Earth, creating what is now the Sudbury basin in Canada. The impact allowed a rich
seam of nickel-copper ore to rise through the Earths crust around the rim of the
crater. Today the Sudbury basin is circled with the worlds largest concentration of
nickel mines and in one of them, scientists accompany the miners on their morning
descent to the 6800 ft (2000 m) level.
The Sudbury landscape still has an unearthly quality about it. Early mining efforts
stripped away trees to provide fuel for smelting the ore, with the result that in the
1960s the Sudbury basin resembled a moonscape. NASA even sent moonshot
astronauts there for training. Today the trees are coming back, thanks in part to the
mines themselves, where underground nurseries provide warm stable conditions for
trees to grow. All you have to add is light, said Art McDonald, director of the
Sudbury Neutrino Observatory (SNO) as we stepped off the lift 2000 m underground.
Here the rock is constantly at a temperature of 40C, making for a sticky 1.5 km walk
along the SNO drift - the tunnel connecting the mine shaft to SNOs underground
laboratory.
Cleanliness is the key
Visiting SNO is an adventure in itself. Scientists and miners are indistinguishable in
all but their conversation as they descend in the lift. Overalls, miners lamps and
safety harnesses are the order of the day. Everything to be taken into the lab must be
carefully wrapped in plastic to protect it from the omnipresent mine dust. Arriving at
the lab, boots are rinsed down, clothes are removed and everyone takes a shower
before changing into a clean set of overalls and entering the lab.
Scrupulous attention to cleanliness is one of the keys to SNOs success. Incredibly,
the laboratory maintains class-100 clean-room conditions in the most sensitive areas
and all areas are class-3000 or better. That means that everywhere within the
laboratory there are fewer than 3000 particles of 1 m or larger per 1 m3 of air. A
typical room would give a count of around 100 000 particles and the SNO drift
considerably more. Even more impressive is that these clean conditions were
maintained throughout the construction of the experiment.
The emphasis on purity does not end with the air. Systems for purifying the SNO
detectors light and heavy water fill most of the available space. The 33 m deep, 22 m
diameter chamber that houses the detector is lined with several layers of plastic
material that help to keep the radiation level from uranium and thorium a full nine
orders of magnitude lower than in the surrounding rock.
Herb Chens experiment
SNO began collecting data in 1999, but its history goes back much
further. In 1984 Herb Chen of the University of California at Irvine
first pointed out the advantages of using heavy water as a detector
for solar neutrinos. Two reactions - one sensitive only to electrontype neutrinos, the other sensitive to all neutrino flavours - would
Herb Chen
allow such a detector to measure neutrino oscillations directly. The
18
Creighton mine in Sudbury - among the deepest in the world - was quickly identified
as an ideal place for Chens proposed experiment to be built and the SNO
collaboration held its first meeting in 1984.
There were substantial obstacles to overcome before the experiment could be
realized, not least of which was the cost of the heavy water. It was clear from the start
that industrial partners would have to be found. INCO, the company operating the
Creighton mine, became a key player, putting its infrastructure at SNOs disposal and
blasting out a new cavern for the experiment far away from ongoing mine activity.
Another key partner was found in the form of Atomic Energy of Canada Limited,
which provided C$330 million of heavy water on loan, free of charge. In a sense
were doing a greater than C$600 million project for less than C$100 million in terms
of capital cost, explained McDonald.
The experiment was approved in 1990. Excavation took three years and installation
a further five. The detector consists of a 12 m diameter acrylic sphere containing 1000
tonnes of heavy water surrounded by light water and viewed by 10 000
photomultipliers. Filling the sphere with heavy water, flooding the cavern with light
water and calibrating the detector was complete by November 1999, allowing data
taking to begin.
In its first phase of running - to June 2001 - SNOs analysis concentrated on the
measurement of boron-8 electron neutrinos from the Sun. These are detected at SNO
via the charged current process of electron neutrinos interacting with deuterons to
produce two protons and an electron. First results published in 2001, taken together
with Superkamiokandes previous measurement (The Sudbury Neutrino Observatory
confirms the oscillation picture) via the elastic scattering of boron-8 neutrinos from
electrons with low sensitivity to neutrino types other than electron neutrinos, provide
compelling evidence for neutrino oscillation.
The next step for SNO was to measure the total boron-8 neutrino flux to give a
complete measurement that is independent of the Superkamiokande result. To do this,
salt has been added to the heavy water. Salt increases SNOs sensitivity to the
flavour-blind process of neutral current neutrino-deuteron interactions, which are
identified by the detection of the photon emitted when the deuterons neutron is
captured. Capture on heavy water results in a 6.25 MeV photon, whereas capture on
chlorine releases an 8.6 MeV photon that is more easily detected. Moreover, the
neutron capture probability in SNOs heavy water is around 25%, whereas in salt it
rises to 85%. Radioactivity levels are also low for this phase of the experiment and
data analysis is under way.
In a third phase of running, scheduled to begin in the second half of 2002, the salt
will be removed and replaced by helium-3-filled proportional counters. These will
give the experiment an independent sensitivity to the neutral current process and
allow distortions in the solar boron-8 spectrum to be measured more accurately than
before.
Supernovae warning
Solar neutrinos form just one strand of SNOs research programme.
The experiments ability to single out electron-neutrino interactions
and its high sensitivity to other neutrino types gives it a powerful tool
for investigating supernovae by observing the time development
between different neutrino types emerging from the explosion.
SNOs data-acquisition system, normally running at around 10 Hz, is
SNO schematic
set up to buffer several hundred events in a window lasting just a few
19
seconds if necessary, and it also alerts the shift crew whenever the event rate rises
significantly. This initiates an analysis procedure, designed to identify whether noise
or physics is responsible for the rise. SNO will be part of the Supernova Early
Warning System (SNEWS) along with the LVD (Gran Sasso), Superkamiokande
(Japan) and Amanda (South Pole) experiments. Signals sent to a central computer in
Japan can be studied for time coincidences and the astronomical community can be
alerted in the case of a supernova. The neutrino burst can precede light by several
hours.
The detectors location 2000 m below a flat surface also makes it a particularly
powerful instrument for observing neutrinos created via cosmic-ray interactions in the
atmosphere. In contrast with detectors under mountains, SNO has a 45 window for
measuring downward-moving neutrinos. A clear distinction between downward and
upward-moving neutrinos will allow SNO to make a model-independent measurement
of atmospheric neutrinos over a three- to four-year timescale.
SNO has a well defined programme until 2006 and ambitious plans thereafter. The
scientists envisage a shift in emphasis towards more subtle neutrino physics and
possible improvements to the SNO detector. Seasonal variations and correlations with
the solar cycle are on the agenda. SNO will also turn its attention to other neutrino
oscillation processes in the Sun.
Canadian scientists are hopeful of extending the laboratory beyond
the one experiment that it currently houses. The Canadian
government has recently launched the Canadian Foundation for
Innovation International Programme to generate world-class
international research facilities in Canada, and Sudbury is a strong
heavy water
contender. Having passed the first round of selection, the laboratory
has been invited to submit a detailed proposal by February. Under this C$30 million
plan, the Sudbury site would acquire a new experimental hall to house at least two
new experiments. Final selection is scheduled for June 2002.
Herb Chen didnt live to see his brainchild realized. He died in 1987, but his
presence at Sudbury is still very strongly felt. Copies of his 1984 Physical Review
Letters paper hang proudly around the laboratory and his portrait graces the entrance.
SNO has put Sudbury firmly on the physics map, but it hasnt lost sight of its roots.
The SNO team is working very hard to accomplish the full physics objectives while
maintaining Herbs memory as a constant inspiration, explained McDonald.
Bose-Einstein condensation
20
Nobel condensate - how alkali metal atoms come together as the temperature is
decreased. The image shows Bose-Einstein condensation at, from left to right, 400,
200, and 50 nK.
Laboratory Profile
SNO cavity
2000 metres underground - excavation of the underground cavity for the Sudbury
Neutrino Observatory detector.
Werner Heisenberg: the Columbus of quantum mechanics

This year marks the centenary of the birth of Werner Heisenberg, pioneer of
quantum mechanics and theoretical high-energy physics. Helmut Rechenberg,
Heisenbergs last postgraduate, co-editor of his collected works and co-author of
the multivolume opus The Historical Development of Quantum Theory, traces the
life of a quantum figurehead.
This year, 5 December marks the centenary of Werner
Heisenbergs birth. It is to him that we owe the first breakthrough
of modern atomic theory - the invention of quantum mechanics.
His famous uncertainty relations were a central part of its
interpretation. He also established several fundamental quantum
mechanics applications and pioneered the extension of the theory
Heisenberg - 1920s
to high-energy phenomena.
Werner Heisenberg, born in Wrzburg, came from an academic family and after
1910 grew up in Munich, where he graduated with distinction from high school in
1920. He studied under Arnold Sommerfeld at the University of Munich, obtaining
his PhD in July 1923 and then went on to work under Max Born in Gttingen. In
1924 Niels Bohr invited him to Copenhagen. Thus he became a member of the great
21
international post-First World War community of quantum and atomic theorists,

including such brilliant talents as Paul Dirac, Enrico Fermi, Friedrich Hund, Pascual
Jordan, Oskar Klein, Hendrik Kramers, Wolfgang Pauli and Gregor Wentzel.
In the very first semester Sommerfeld gave Heisenberg the difficult problem of
explaining the anomalous Zeeman effect of sodium spectral lines. The freshman
found a perfect solution - exhibiting, however, unusual half-integral quantum numbers
and a strangely behaving atomic core. Simultaneously he studied the classical
hydrodynamical turbulence problem. On the publication of Heisenbergs first paper in
this field in 1922, Sommerfeld remarked to Heisenbergs father: You belong to an
irreproachable family of philologists, and now you have the misfortune of seeing the
sudden appearance of a mathematical-physical genius in your family. In his PhD
thesis, Heisenberg suggested the first method for deriving the critical Reynolds
number, marking the transition from laminar to turbulent motion. In spite of this
brilliant work, he nearly failed the experimental part of the doctoral exam with Willy
Wien.
The breakthrough
In 1923, contemporary atomic theory was in a deep crisis. As a way out of the
situation, Pauli, who was in Copenhagen, and Born and Heisenberg who were in
Gttingen, proposed replacing the semiclassical differential expressions of Bohr and
Sommerfeld by corresponding discrete difference terms to predict experimental
quantum results (the 1925 Kramers-Heisenberg formula, which predicted the Raman
effect, for example). Heisenberg and Pauli claimed that fundamental concepts of the
old theory, notably electron orbits, had to be abandoned completely.
In May 1925, in Gttingen, Heisenberg began to describe atomic
systems by observables only (quantum-theoretical Fourier series).
With this, the usual physical quantities, like position q and
momentum p of an electron, did not commute but satisfied instead
the relation pq - qp = h/2i. In June 1925 when Heisenberg was
recovering from a severe attack of hay fever on the island of
CERN 1960
Heligoland, he found that he could satisfy the necessary requirement
of energy conservation in atomic processes. His quantum-theoretical reformulation
was the breakthrough to modern quantum mechanics. Soon Born and Jordan
reformulated it as matrix mechanics and Paul Dirac as q number theory, and
applied it successfully, as Heisenberg and Pauli did, to various atomic problems.
It was in 1926 that Erwin Schrdinger created wave mechanics, formally equivalent
to matrix mechanics, but working with differential equations and continuous
wavefunctions. Schrdinger claimed that nature exhibited no quantum jumps at all.
Heisenberg, from spring 1926 a lecturer and Bohrs principal assistant in
Copenhagen, contradicted this and in early 1927 derived the central result of the
physical interpretation: simultaneous measurements of momentum and position of an
atomic particle were limited by the famous uncertainty relation: p. q ~ h. This
relation had radical consequences - the classical causality law or, expressed more
generally, the possibility of a strict separation of object and subject, ceased to be valid
in quantum science.
In the fall of 1927, Heisenberg became professor of theoretical physics at Leipzig.
Together with Peter Debye and Friedrich Hund he established a new centre of atomic
physics there. His first students, Felix Bloch and Rudolf Peierls, pioneered with him
the quantum mechanics of solids (ferromagnetism, metals and semiconductors).
22
High-energy theory and elementary particles

Heisenbergs main interest, however, was a relativistic extension of
quantum mechanics: with Pauli he formulated Lagrangian quantum
field theory (1929). They tried to cope with the emerging divergence
difficulties, achieving some progress with renormalization
procedures (Heisenberg 1934; Weisskopf 1934). Originally they
were led to expect that quantum mechanics would not apply any
CERN 1971
more at high energy. However, after the discovery of the neutron in
1932, Heisenberg proposed a quantum-mechanical theory of the atomic nucleus based
on new exchange forces.
During the 1930s, nuclear theory progressed enormously, mainly through work in
the US and in Japan (notably by Hideki Yukawa with his meson theory) and further at
Leipzig (despite the Nazi government depriving Heisenberg of excellent students and
collaborators after 1933).
From 1932 Heisenberg also turned his attention to the high-energy phenomena
observed in cosmic radiation. He suggested several new ideas, such as explosive
showers, and in 1938, with his student Hans Euler, he solved the problem of the socalled hard component (unstable mesotrons). These efforts aimed ultimately at an
ambitious goal that he and Pauli had envisaged: a unified quantum field theory,
describing all elementary particles and their interactions, without any divergences and
allowing all of their properties (such as masses and coupling constants) to be
calculated. More than 30 years later they still had not reached their goal.
However, during their labours, Heisenberg and Pauli created many concepts of
modern high-energy physics, such as isotopic spin (Heisenberg, 1932), spin-statistics
theory (Pauli and Fierz, from 1937 to 1941), and the symmetry breaking caused by a
degenerate vacuum (Heisenberg and Pauli 1958). In addition, in 1942 Heisenberg
proposed the so-called S-Matrix theory, which was widely discussed after the
Second World War as a phenomenological approach in quantum electrodynamics and
strong-interaction theory. Another noteworthy result was the logarithmically rising
total cross-section for particle collisions at higher energies (Heisenberg 1954).
Science, politics and international relations
During the Third Reich (1933-1945), Heisenbergs life and work was made difficult
not only by racism directed against his Jewish teachers, colleagues and students, but
also by outright attacks on him and his scientific work. Nazi partisans considered
quantum and relativity theories to be degenerate, Jewish physics, the defenders of
which had to disappear like the Jews. In spite of these attacks, and in spite of
generous offers to accept prestigious chairs in the US, Heisenberg remained in
Germany, believing that he did not have the moral right to abandon his students and
his country during such difficult times.
During the Second World War he was drafted into the secret German atomic energy
project, working on a nuclear reactor, but not on a bomb. In 1942 he moved to Berlin
to take over the directorship of the Kaiser Wilhelm-Institut fr Physik (which
eventually became the Max Planck Institute).
After the war he successfully helped to renew science in the Federal Republic of
Germany and to re-establish international scientific relations, assisted by many friends
in Europe and beyond. Thus he became a co-founder and ardent supporter of CERN
(and the first chairman of its scientific policy committee). He considered international
co-operation, especially in the most fundamental fields of science (such as highenergy physics), to be a main tool to reach understanding between peoples. As
23
president of the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, he invited hundreds of young

research scholars from all around the world to work at German universities and
scientific institutes, and high-energy physics received a substantial share of these
fellowships.
Werner Heisenberg died on 1 February 1976 in Munich. To commemorate his 80th
anniversary, the Max Planck Institute for Physics (which he had transferred in 1958
from Gttingen to Munich) was given the additional name Werner-HeisenbergInstitut.
The centenary is being marked by several special events. From 26-30 September a
meeting with the title 100 years of Werner Heisenberg was held by the Alexander
von Humboldt Foundation at Bamberg; from 4-7 December a Heisenberg centennial
event at the Max Planck Institute and Ludwig-Maximilians University, Munich,
includes a two-day symposium with nine distinguished speakers from abroad; and
from 3 December to January 2002 there is a Heisenberg exhibition at the University
of Leipzig and at the Max-Planck-Haus, Munich. For more information, see
http://www.heisenberg-centennial.de/.
Further reading
Going into the cold: LHC systems reach an important milestone
The technical systems for CERNs forthcoming Large Hadron Collider
(LHC) reached an important milestone earlier this year with the
successful commissioning of String 2 - a chain of prototype LHC
magnets complete with all of the necessary powering, control and
protection systems. String 2 is the final testbed for validating LHC
systems before the new accelerator is installed in its tunnel ready for its
String 2
start-up in 2006.
When the LHC starts up in five years time, it will be the worlds largest
superconducting installation of any kind. Nearly all of its main magnets, some 2000 in
total, will be bathed in superfluid helium at 1.9 K. Such a low temperature is required
to keep the magnets superconducting, but maintaining it presents many challenges.
The cold mass of each magnet is installed inside a vacuum vessel and rests on hightech composite feet that are actively cooled from room temperature to 1.9 K over 25
cm. A similar active cooling scheme is used for the cables that monitor the magnets.
String 2 is the first LHC systems testbed to be built to the LHCs final design and it
is the last chance for LHC engineers to validate their design choices before the
installation of the new accelerator underground. In its current configuration, String 2
consists of three prototype dipole magnets, two quadrupoles, and a full-scale
prototype distribution line for the cryogenic fluids that cool the magnets. Three more
dipoles are scheduled to be added, which will turn String 2 into a full cell of the LHC
accelerator. Completing the String 2 set-up are 15 electrical powering circuits with
final-design power converters, and a digital current regulation system capable of
measuring magnet currents to a few parts per million.
String 2 was cooled down to 1.9 K in mid-September for systems validation tests.
The LHCs superconducting magnets are sensitive devices. If any part of their cable
winding heats up, it provokes what is known as a quench - the magnet ceases to
superconduct and the energy stored inside it has to be dissipated. Testing the systems
that detect quenches and protect the magnets was the first part of the validation
programme and was carried out before the magnets were ramped up to nominal
current of 11 850 A on 27 September. A full programme of system validation tests in
24
which the entire String is being put through its paces is now under way. All systems
are being tested in normal running conditions, during the ramping up and down of the
magnet currents, and during provoked quenches.
String 2
The String 2 test installation for CERNs Large Hadron Collider
Astrowatch
Astronomers celebrate sight of two million year old baby
A very small, faint galaxy more than 13.4 billion light-years from Earth is creating a
great deal of excitement among astronomers. This protogalaxy, which is just 500
light-years across (a two-hundredth of the size of the Milky Way), is thought to be
one of the building blocks of todays galaxies. It may prove to be an important
missing piece in the puzzle of how and when the first stars and galaxies formed in the
universe.
The discovery was made thanks to the gravitational lensing of light from the distant
protogalaxy by a huge cluster of galaxies along the line of sight. The cluster
effectively magnified the light from the protogalaxy.
The protogalaxy was first identified from images taken from the Hubble Space
Telescope archive, and further observations of its spectrum were made using the two
10 m Keck telescopes in Hawaii. The observations reveal a 2 million year old, 1
million solar mass, galaxy-like object consisting of young hot stars.
Previous galaxies discovered at high redshifts are extremely bright. This is the first
time that a faint protogalaxy has been analysed, owing to the amplification of its
signal by the gravitational lens.
25
Picture of the month
Symposium 213
Bioastronomy 2002: Life Among the Stars

Great Barrier Reef, 8-12 July 2002
Fulbright Symposium
website now available
Sponsors to date
SETI Institute,
California
NASA
Astrobiology
Institute
International
Astronomical
Union
Australia
Telescope
National Facility
The above picture is of the Heart

Reef near Hamilton Island where
the Bioastronomy Conference will
be held. The natural formation is
one of the many wonders of the
Great Barrier Reef
Virtual Press
Room
An invitation to Who Should
you
Attend
The Great Barrier
Registration
Reef
The Whitsunday
Accommodation
Islands
Plenary
Post Conference
Speakers
Tours
Conference
Register your
Facilities
interest
Newsletter #1
Newsletter #2
Committees
Anglo
Australian
Observatory
Introduction
University of
Western Sydney
26
LATEST NEWS
Hamilton Island special
offer on rooms!
An invitation to you
Plenary Speakers
Newsletter #2
January 18, 2002
In Search of E.T.s Breath

Advanced space telescopes might soon probe far-off
worlds for the chemical signatures of alien life.
January 17, 2002
Astrobiology Profile: David WynnWilliams

Meet David Wynn-Williams, microbiologist for the
British Antarctic Survey. Explore his groundbreaking
research and experience a typical day in wild
Antarctica through this new video called
Expeditions.
January 16, 2002
Living on Fools Gold

Reseachers study chemolithotrophy bacteria that
survive by getting its energy by oxidizing pyrite, also
known as fools gold.
27
Living on Fools Gold

By Leslie Mullen
A bright red river meanders through the
countryside of southwestern Spain, its
water acidic enough to eat through
metal. Such an image brings to mind
the worst excesses of industrial
pollution, and scientists long assumed
that a local copper mine had
contaminated the Tinto River.
Mining activity at the Tinto River dates
back at least 5,000 years, and while it Iron stromatolites in winter (Berrocal).
Credit: Dr. Ricardo Amils
has altered the river it is not solely
responsible for the rivers conditions. Acid rock drainage is a natural process
that occurs when water, oxygen, and bacteria interact with sulfide minerals,
producing highly acidic solutions. The Tinto River runs through the Iberian
Pyritic Belt, one of the biggest complex sulfide formations in the world (pyrite,
or iron sulfide (FeS2), is also known as fools gold).
Ricardo Amils is the director of the laboratory of applied microbiology at the
Center for Molecular Biology at the Autonomous University in Madrid, and is
associated with the Spanish Centro de Astrobiologia. Amils has been studying
the Tinto Rivers ecosystem for over 10 years. He says the waters red color
and average pH of 2 is due to this natural abundance of sulfide. Amils believes
that bacteria living in the river turn this sulfide into sulfuric acid, giving the river
its low pH. Other bacteria oxidize the iron, giving the river its signature red
color. Although both sulfur and iron naturally oxidize when exposed to air, the
bacteria act as catalysts, speeding up the reactions considerably.
The water table and the high temperatures all year around favor the growth of
chemolithotrophic bacteria, which exist in high amounts in the river and
probably in underground waters, says Amils. The most important
characteristics of the system - sulfuric acid and high concentrations of ferric
iron - are products of chemolithotrophic activity using pyrite and other sulfidic
minerals.
Chemolithotrophy is a metabolic
process used by microorganisms to
obtain energy from inorganic molecules.
In the case of the Rio Tinto, rock
eating bacteria like Leptospirillum
ferrooxidans and Acidithiobacillus
ferrooxidans get energy by oxidizing the
ferrous iron (Fe2+) in the pyrite, turning
it into ferric iron (Fe3+) (The
Acidophilic demateaceus fungi (black
Acidithiobacillus also get energy by
fungi) from Rio Tinto.
oxidizing the sulfide). Because very little
28
energy is generated in the oxidation of ferrous to ferric iron, these bacteria

must oxidize large amounts of iron in order to grow. As a result, relatively little
bacterial growth results in massive amounts of ferric iron precipitation.
It is not precisely known how bacteria oxidize the ferrous iron. Scientists
believe the process relies on both chemical and biological forces working
together.
The combination of sulfuric acid and ferric iron in the water produces
conditions that promote the oxidation of other metals such as arsenic, copper,
cadmium and nickel. Many metals become much more soluble when oxidized,
so this increases the concentration of metals in the river.
The chemistry of the Tinto River is not completely
unique the Iron Mountain mine in California, for
instance, can reach negative pH levels due to
chemolithotrophic activity but the length of the
Tinto River makes it an ideal place to study life
based on sulfide and iron.
Microbes and substrates are available in many
places around the world, says Amils. What
makes the Tinto different is the proportion: a 90
kilometer-long acidic river. This probably
facilitated the adaptation of many different
systems.
Dr. Ricardo Amils
measuring the pH of the Rio
Indeed, bacteria are not the only life forms found
Tinto in its very origin.
in the river. Amilss team has collected about
1,300 different organisms, including archaea,
yeast, fungi, and protists. The most abundant biomass in the river seems to be
algae. Blooms of algae often coat the surface of the water, turning the red
water green and producing bubbles of oxygen. Amils thinks it is strange how
eukaryotic organisms like algae are able perform in such harsh conditions of
acidity and heavy metal concentrations (Eukaryotes are organisms that have a
DNA-holding nuclear membrane in their
cells).
But Ken Nealson, an astrobiologist
with NASAs Jet Propulsion Laboratory,
says keeping acid out of a cell is not
that difficult for eukaryotes. Simple
eukaryotes can often survive in low or
high pH environments, as well as in
extremes of salinity and dryness.
Studies of any extreme environment
Water sample from the river in which always extend our appreciation of
evolution and adaptation, says
different eukaryotic cells (Heliozoa,
Nealson. One thing that is often
diatoms, dinoflagelates) and
prokaryotes (much more smaller) can forgotten is that very seldom is only one
thing extreme, and adaptation to one
be seen.
variable almost always is connected
with adaptations to others.
Figuring out the biology of the Tinto River could help Amils and others
understand the development of early life on Earth. For instance, the Tinto River
may be a real-life model for Proterozoic life (2.5 billion to 544 million years
ago), since aerobic algae first appeared during the Proterozoic. But Amils
says the biology of the Tinto River may have a connection even further back in
the past, with the Archaean era (3.8 to 2.5 billion years ago).
Most of the biological microbes that you can find now days in Rio Tinto
29
probably existed in the Archaean, says Amils. He cites recent molecular

evidence for the presence of algae 2.7 billion years ago in Pilbara, Australia.
There is also evidence for the complete operation of the sulfur cycle in Pilbara,
with oxidation and reduction (or redox reactions) dating back 3.5 billion years.
Iron was massively precipitated in Pilbara, and all these ingredients are
operation in this very moment in Rio Tinto, says Amils. The only difference is
that the Australian Archaean system was in a shallow marine environment,
while Rio Tinto corresponds to a terrestrial aquatic system.
Research into Tinto river biology also could determine whether biological iron
fractionation could be a useful biomarker in the search for life on Earth and on
other planets. In other words, could we look at the division of iron isotopes in a
rock as evidence that iron-based life once existed there?
Research in the Rio Tinto will almost certainly help us to determine whether
iron fractionation occurs in such acidic environments, says Nealson. Whether
it is a good biomarker will depend on the results. Even if not, the river is not
excluded from being useful for learning about iron metabolism in other
environments.
By studying the Tinto Rivers biology, says Amils, we can better understand
how a biological system based on iron functions.
Until now biohydrometallurgists have concentrated on sulfur because they
thought that life based on iron could not be efficient, says Amils. Rio Tinto
and other systems show that this is not true. But we still need to determine
what are the products of this metabolism, how can we recognize them, and
what are the suitable instruments to be used for its detection.
Perhaps organisms similar to those
found in the Tinto River could have
developed on Mars. The Martian soil
appears reddish because of iron in the
soil, and some scientists believe that
Mars once had rivers and other surface
water. Mars is also a very sulfur-rich
planet, so microorganisms on Mars also
could survive by oxidizing sulfide.
A view of the iron stromatolites
We need to learn more about Mars
during the summer.
before we know if this is a good
analogue, says Nealson. However,
given that sulfuric acid production requires oxygen, and there may not be easy
ways to generate this acid without it, knowing the oxidative history of Mars will
be very important. Either way, the Rio Tinto is a great place to understand
adaptation and evolution of life and constrain our thinking about life
elsewhere.
Researchers from the Centro de Astrobiologia have suggested that the Tinto
River also makes a good Europa analogy. Jupiters moon Europa is thought
to have an acidic, salty ocean under its outer layer of ice. Thus, the Tinto
River could represent a unique biological setting to investigate the possibility of
sulfur-based life on Europa.
What Next?
Amils is collaborating with different groups of the NASA Astrobiology Institute
to characterize the iron formations of the Tinto River and the eukaryotic
diversity of the system. He is also using conventional and molecular
techniques to characterize the prokaryotic diversity of the river in order to
understand how the system works.
30
We believe that chemolithotrophy is an ancient energy system, and we need

to know more about it, says Amils. We have to learn what happened with iron
in the Archaean, for instance. There are many questions that we can start to
address using a living system. This is the advantage of the Tinto.
Featured Profile:
David Wynn-Williams
56k (3.7mb) | T1 (15mb)

The Multi-Tasking Pigments of
Antarctica
By Holly Davis and Daniella Scalice
Imagine hot chocolate with breakfast, sliding on

heavy-duty sun glasses, skiing down a perfect
white slope, and watching your breath form little
clouds in the subzero temperatures as you swish
past fascinating rock formations. Sound good?
Well, far from being a winter ski weekend in the
luxurious Swiss Alps, these events are part of a
typical day in the field for microbiologist David
Wynn-Williams of the British Antarctic Survey. His research, funded in part
by the NASA Astrobiology Institute, while focussing on one of lifes smallest
creatures, addresses one of humankinds biggest questions: Did life evolve
on Mars?
Step one: becoming photosynthetic
31
Dr. Wynn-Williams studies microscopic bacteria

called cyanobacteria living in one of Earths
harshest environments, the dry deserts of
Antarcticas inland valleys. The cyanobacteria, or
blue-green algae, Wynn-Williams studies live not
only on the surface of the ground, but inside the
rocks and soil as well. They can penetrate up to 8
mm into hard rock, about the thickness of a CD
case. The sandstone in which they grow allows enough light through so the
cyanobacteria can do their thing: photosynthesize. Using special molecules
inside their cells, some of which are called pigments, they harvest light
energy from the sun and carbon dioxide from the air and turn them into
sugars - food, or energy - that they can eat in order to live and grow. This
food, which they incredibly produce within themselves through the process of
photosynthesis, is their sole source of sustenance.
Photo = light, synthesis = create, photosynthesis = to create using light.
Indeed, the cyanobacteria Dr. Wynn-Williams studies in the Antarctic are
photosynthetic, but he believes they evolved from a similar, more primitive
ancestor who had never seen the sun. It is believed that life may have
originated underwater in a sea-floor hydrothermal vent. situation, and those life
forms, probably bacterial, did not have the ability to carry out photosynthesis.
That is, they did not use light from the sun as their source of energy. Rather,
they used the energy released when heavy elements such as iron and
magnesium (abundant in hydrothermal vent fluid) undergo chemical
reactions and change form. The theory is that life was not originally
photosynthetic because the conditions under which life arose did not involve
direct sunlight. Life became photosynthetic. Wynn-Williams believes the
same type of evolution could have occurred on Mars.
As the story goes, life eventually rose from the bottom of the ocean to the
surface, and learned how to use pigment molecules to harness the energy of
the sun to make food. But the suns energy, while indispensable for survival,
can also be harmful to microbes, and they need to protect themselves. As it
turns out, the pigments used by the Antarctic cyanobacteria for
photosynthesis have an additional, crucial role. During the winter months, the
hole in Earths protective stratospheric ozone layer naturally widens, flooding
the continent with ultraviolet radiation from the sun. Such UV radiation would
give us a sunburn, so we would simply put on sunscreen to protect
ourselves. But whats a cyanobacterium to do? Use its pigments, of course.
Natures Sunscreen: Pigments

In order to live in such an inhospitable
environment, the cyanobacteria employ all their
resources, including their pigment molecules, for
survival. These pigments not only function to
harvest light energy for photosynthesis, they also
serve as a shield to protect the organisms
vulnerable DNA from the damaging, mutagenic UV
rays of the sun. Finally, the pigments also help the
bacteria expel excess energy that builds up within its cells.
But the pigment story goes on. Unlike mammals, who have skeletons made
of hard bone which can last for eons, cyanobacteria and other
microorganisms are made simply of fluid contained by a membrane - imagine
a tiny soap bubble filled with water. So when they die, they dont leave
obvious signs or markers telling us where theyve been, like dinosaurs leave
their skeletons behind for us to dig up. But what they do leave behind are
molecules called hopanoids (breakdown products of pigments), lying there in
the rock and soil for anyone to see. Anyone that is, who knows how to look.
32
Inspector Gadget, Take Note: Introducing the Mini Raman Spectrometer

Dr. Wynn-Williams, it just so happens, has an
instrument called a Raman spectrometer which
can detect these fossilized pigments left behind by
microorganisms which lived in Antarctica 3 billion
years ago, about two thirds as long as the Earth
itself has existed. Wynn-Williams determines
which fossilized pigments are indicative of which
ancient cyanobacteria using his mini Raman
spectrometer that weighs only a kilogram (2.2 pounds) and fits easily in a
backpack. The Raman spectrometer consists of a laser beam which is shone
into rock or soil to determine which molecules and chemicals are there. The
spectrometer measures both organic, or carbon-containing, and inorganic, or
non-carbon-containing molecules. This allows scientists to determine the
unique fingerprint of each pigment in the cyanobacteria, as well as the
composition of the minerals in the rocks or soil in which they live.
The laser in the spectrometer produces light of one wavelength. In the latest
version it emits light with a wavelength of 1064 nanometers, which is in the
near infrared range just below the threshold of what our eyes can see. When
scientists shine the laser into a sample, most of the light comes back at the
same wavelength, but some of it is scattered by the vibrations of the
molecules.
Vibrating Molecules + Light = Spectra

Everything on this planet that is above absolute
zero temperature
(-273 degrees Celsius) is vibrating at some
frequency. How a molecule is constructed
determines how it vibrates. For simple, inorganic
molecules, the type of vibration depends on the
bonds linking the atoms. For larger, organic
molecules, the vibrations depend on structural
features such as rings, double bonds, and side chains.
These vibrations change the wavelength of the laser light ever so slightly,
Wynn-Williams explains. Its a bit like what you might have heard of as the
Doppler shift. If a police car is going past you, the sound of its siren seems
stronger as the car approaches, and softer as it goes away. With light, the
wavelength is slightly shorter when parts of a molecule vibrate toward the
laser and slightly longer when the molecules parts
are vibrating away.
When the detector head reads all the light that has
been scattered back from the vibrating molecules,
the spectrometer reports a dominant signal at the
lasers original wavelength, which is used as a
reference point. On either side of that point,
scientists see some wavelengths that are shorter
and some that are longer. This range of
wavelengths comprises the spectrum, hence the name spectrometer. In
other words, the spectrum is made up of all the deviations from the original
wavelength of light.
Dr. Wynn-Williams has been taking pure samples, measuring their spectra,
and cataloging them to create a library of known organisms and pigments.
When he goes out into the field and takes spectra from an unknown sample,
he can reference his library of spectra to determine the molecules present in
the unknown. For example, the spectra produced from a lichen, which is a
33
combination of algae and fungi, consists of one mountainous peak with lots
of little peaks on the shoulder of the mountain. Using his catalog of spectra,
he can recognize the little peaks on the shoulder of the mountain and say
with certainty which types of molecules are in a lichen.
From Antarctica to Mars

In Antarctica, Wynn-Williams is using the Raman
spectrometer to identify pigments belonging to
microorganisms that existed three billion years
ago. We can shine the laser light into ancient
[dead] microbes as fossils, or into modern [living]
ones and we can recognize the biomolecules they
contain, and so we could potentially put one of
these things on Mars, Wynn-Williams says.
Successful use of the spectrometer doesnt require that the sample be
prepared in any special way, or the microbes be extracted from the rock in
which they live. This makes it an ideal tool for remote exploration on Mars.
In order to find either ancient, fossilized microbes or modern, living ones on
Mars, one must drill down at least a couple of meters (about 6 feet) into the
soil. Scientists dont expect to find any hint of biological organisms at the
surface since the strong ultraviolet radiation hitting the planet would have
caused any organic molecules to oxidize long ago. The carbon from any
biological life would have turned to carbon dioxide as it was oxidized over
time, vaporizing into the Martian atmosphere. But if microbes did evolve on
Mars, then their biomolecules could still be in the fossil record, or they could
be in permafrost, says Wynn-Williams, and if we drill a hole in the surface
of Mars, and lower down the detector head of one of these little Raman
spectrometers, we should be able to recognize the fingerprints of the same
sort of pigments that we find in these microbes in the Antarctic.
It is possible the Raman spectrometer will fly on a 2005 mission to Mars
aboard the Mars Express Lander sponsored by the European Space Agency.
The instruments probe would be housed in metal casing called a mole,
which drills itself down into the ground. A side window in the mole would
allow the spectrometer to take readings of each layer of soil as the mole digs
deeper and deeper into the Martian ground.
Before flying to Mars, however, the spectrometer will head to the Antarctic
dry valleys which are remarkably similar to present day Mars. Testing the
spectrometer on the cyanobacteria in Antarctica will give scientists a library
of chemical signatures or fingerprints for microbes in the Antarctic soil. Any
chemical fingerprints the spectrometer finds on Mars can be compared to the
library of Earth microbes.
Not only will the spectrometer identify any microbe

it finds by the pigments it detects, but it can also
help scientists say something about the bacterias
environment, its ecosystem. The spectrometer can
identify the chemical composition of the soil or
rock in which a microbe either became fossilized
or currently lives.
Because pigments can last seemingly forever, far beyond the life of the
organism from which it came, and because they apparently are molecules
produced only by living things, pigments can be referred to as biomarkers.
Using the pigments as biomarkers allows scientists to address the question:
will we be able to recognize life on other planets if we find it?
34
The reason Im zeroing in on pigments is we know we can detect them,

Wynn-Williams says. The chances are that life originated on Earth and on
Mars in a geothermal environment, near black smoker vents, but its difficult
to recognize it definitively. You need a really strong signal of some sort,
which says this was life.
Pigments fit that bill. Anything that lives near the surface of a planet is
exposed to sunlight. It has to produce pigments of some kind to protect itself
from ultraviolet radiation and/or to harness solar energy to produce
chemicals for food. One way or another pigments are essential to living
things at a planetary surface. The Raman spectrometer is the ideal
instrument for detecting the signals produced by pigments from microbes,
either alive or dead.
It is up to the people who interpret those signals to decide: if we detect the
presence of pigments on Mars, will that be enough evidence to say with
certainty that life originated and evolved there? Are we still alone? Or would
pigments on Mars possibly be the remains of our ancient brethren?
Click here for a printable version of these ten long-term science goals.
Astrobiology is the scientific study of the living universe; its past, present, and future.
It starts with investigating life on Earth, the only place where life is known to exist,
and extends into the farthest reaches of the cosmos. It ranges in time from the big
bang and continues on into the future.
Astrobiology covers a diverse range of topics which can be categorized under major
questions: Where did life come from? What is its future? Are we alone in the
universe? While these questions have been asked for millennia, rapid advances in the
sciences and the ability to travel out into space have set the stage for a novel scientific
examination. As any such newborn, Astrobiology is growing and maturing rapidly.
Breakthroughs and discoveries are routine. But rather than a description of each new
research finding, the definition of Astrobiology must be that of a whole, greater than
the sum of its parts. It is a collaborative effort; a new practice that leverages and
transcends traditional scientific discipline boundaries to create an innovation in
interdisciplinary communication.
Astrobiology absorbs the information from chemistry, geology, astronomy, planetary
science, paleontology, oceanography, physics, biology, mathematics and emerges
with a unique perspective. One inaccessible from within each component discipline
alone. One characterized by both diversity and unity in the pursuit of knowledge
about the universe, and our place within it.
ten long-term science goals
origin of life on earth
Understand how life arose on the Earth.
35
Terrestrial life is the only form of life that we know, and it appears to have arisen
from a common ancestor. How and where did this remarkable event occur? The
question can be approached using historical, observational, and experimental
investigations to understand the origin of life on our planet. We can describe the
conditions of Earth when life began, use phylogenetic information to study our
earliest ancestors, and also assess the possibility that life formed elsewhere and
subsequently migrated to Earth.
organization of matter into life
Determine the general principles governing the organization of matter into living
systems.
To understand the full potential of life in the universe we must establish the general
physical and chemical principles of life. We ask if terrestrial biochemistry and
molecular biology are the only such phenomena that can support life? Having only
one example, we do not know which properties of life are general and necessary, and
which are the result of specific circumstances or historical accident. We seek these
answers by pursuing laboratory experimental approaches and computational
theoretical approaches.
evolution of life
Explore how life evolves on the molecular, organism, and ecosystem levels.
Life is a dynamic process of changes in energy and composition that occurs at all
levels of assemblage, from the individual molecules to ecosystem interactions.
Modern genetic analysis, using novel laboratory and computational methods, allows
new insights into the diversity of life and evolution at all levels. Complementary to
such studies are investigations of the evolution of ecosystems consisting of many
interdependent species, especially microbial communities.
evolution of the ecosystem
Determine how the terrestrial biosphere has co-evolved with the Earth.
Just as life evolves in response to changing environments, changing ecosystems alter
the environment of Earth. Astrobiologists seek to understand the diversity and
distribution of our ancient ancestors by developing technology to read the record of
life as captured in biomolecules and in rocks (fossils), to identify specific chemical
interactions between the living components of the Earth (its biosphere) and other
planetary subsystems, and to trace the history of Earths changing environment in
response to external driving forces and to biological modifications.
physics/biology/chemistry
Establish limits for life in environments that provide analogues for conditions on
other worlds.
Life is found on the Earth anywhere liquid water is present, including such extreme
environments as the interior of nuclear reactors, ice-covered Antarctic lakes,
suboceanic hydrothermal vents, and deep subsurface rocks. To understand the
possible environments for life on other worlds, we must investigate the full range of
habitable environments on our own planet, not only for what they can tell us about the
adaptability of life, but also as analogues for conditions on other bodies in our solar
system, such as Mars or Europa.
habitable worlds
Determine what makes a planet habitable and how common these worlds are in
the universe.
Where should we look for extraterrestrial life? Based on our only example (life on
Earth), liquid water is a requirement. We must therefore determine what sorts of
36
planets are likely to have liquid water and how common they might be. Studying the
process of planet formation and surveying a representative sample of planetary
systems will determine what planets are present and how they are distributed,
essential knowledge for judging the frequency of habitable planets.
signatures of life
Determine how to recognize the signature of life on other worlds.

Astrobiologists need to learn to recognize extraterrestrial biospheres and to detect the
signatures of extraterrestrial life. Within our own solar system we must learn to
recognize structural fossils or chemical traces of extinct life that may be found in
extraterrestrial rocks or other samples (such as Martian meteorite ALH84001). To
understand remotely sensed information from planets circling other stars, we should
develop a catalog of possible spectral signatures of life.
life in the solar system
Determine whether there is (or once was) life elsewhere in our solar system,
particularly on Mars and Europa.
Exciting data have presented us with the possibility that at least two other worlds in
our solar system have (or have had) liquid water present. On Mars, there is evidence
for stable flowing water early in that planets history. Both in situ investigations and
the analysis of returned samples will be necessary to understand Mars historical
climates and its potential for life. Because their surfaces are inhospitable, exploration
of the subsurface probably offers the only credible opportunity to find extant life on
either Mars or Europa.
ecosystem perturbations
Determine how ecosystems respond to environmental change on time-scales relevant

to human life on Earth.
Research at the level of the whole biosphere is needed to examine the habitability of
our planet over time in the face of both natural and human-induced environmental
changes. To help assure the continuing health of this planet and to understand the
potential long-term habitability for other planets we need to assess the role of rapid
changes in the environment and develop our knowledge base to enable predictive
models of environment-ecosystem interaction.
expanding beyond earth
Understand the response of terrestrial life to conditions in space or on other

planets.
All terrestrial life has developed in a one-gravity field, protected by the Earths
atmosphere and magnetic field. What happens when terrestrial life is moved off its
home planet and into space or to the Moon or Mars, where the environment is very
different from that of Earth? Can organisms and ecosystems adapt to a completely
novel environment and live successfully over multiple generations? Are alternative
strategies practical, such as bioengineering organisms for specific environments? The
results from attempting to answer such questions will determine whether Earths life
can expand its evolutionary trajectory beyond its place of origin.
by: Barrow, J D ; Dabrowski, M P ;
Email: Mariusz Dabrowski mailto:%20mpd@star.cpes.susx.ac.uk

Publ. Ref.: Phys. Rev., D : 58 (1998) no.10, pp.135021 - Published version
Subjects: General Relativity and Cosmology
See record at SLAC
37
Abstract:
We show that homogeneous Gdel spacetimes need not contain closed timelike
curves in low-energy-effective string theories. We find exact solutions for the
including both dilaton and axion fields. The results are valid for bosonic, heterotic and
super-strings. To first order in the inverse string tension angular velocity of the Gdel
universe, $\Omega ,$ and the inverse string tension of the form $\alpha
^{\prime}=1/\Omega ^2$ in the absence of the axion field. The generalization of this
relationship is also found when the axion field is present.
.
In the summer of 1947, there were a number of UFO sightings in the United States.
Sometime during the first week of July 1947, something crashed near Roswell.
W.W. Mac Brazel, a New Mexico rancher, saddled up his horse and rode out with
the son of neighbors Floyd and Loretta Proctor, to check on the sheep after a fierce
thunderstorm the night before. As they rode along, Brazel began to notice unusual
pieces of what seemed to be metal debris, scattered over a large area. Upon further
inspection, Brazel saw that a shallow trench, several hundred feet long, had been
gouged into the land.
Brazel was struck by the unusual properties of the debris, and after dragging a large
piece of it to a shed, he took some of it over to show ,the Proctors. Mrs. Proctor has
recently ( as of June 1997) moved from the ranch into a home nearer to town, but she
remembers Mac showing up with strange material.
The Proctors told Brazel that he might be holding wreckage from a UFO or a
government project, and that he should report the incident to the sheriff. A day or two
later, Mac drove into Roswell where he reported the incident to Sheriff George
Wilcox, who reported it to Intelligence Officer, Major Jesse Marcel of the 509 Bomb
Group, and for days thereafter, the debris site was closed while the wreckage was
cleared.
On July 8, 1947, a press release stating that the wreckage of a crashed disk had been
recovered was issued by the Commander of the 509th Bomb Group at Roswell, Col.
William Blanchard.
Hours later the first press release was rescinded and the second press release stated
that the 509th Bomb Group had mistakenly identified a weather balloon as wreckage
of a flying saucer.
Meanwhile, back in Roswell, Glenn Dennis, a young mortician working at the Ballard
Funeral Home, received some curious calls one afternoon from the morgue at the air
field. It seems the Mortuary Officer needed to get a hold of some small hermetically
sealed coffins,and wanted information about how to preserve bodies that had been
exposed to the elements for a few days, without contaminating the tissue.
Glenn Dennis drove out to the base hospital later that evening where he saw large
pieces of wreckage with strange engravings on one of the pieces sticking out of the
back of a military ambulance. Upon entering the hospital he started to visit with a
38
nurse he knew, when suddenly he was threatened by military police and forced to
leave.
The next day, Glenn Dennis met with the nurse. She told him about the bodies and
drew pictures of them on a prescription pad. Within a few days she was transferred to
England, her whereabouts still unknown.
According to the research of Don Schmitt and Kevin Randle, in their book, A History
of UFO Crashes, from which the following account of the Roswell Incident , in part,
is based, the military had been watching an unidentified flying object on radar for four
days in southern New Mexico. On the night of July 4, 1947, radar indicated that the
object was down around thirty to forty miles northwest of Roswell.
Eye witness William Woody, who lived east of Roswell, remembered being outside
with his father the night of July 4, 1947, when he saw a brilliant object plunge to the
ground. A couple of days later when Woody and his father tried to locate the area of
the crash, they were stopped by military personnel, who had cordoned off the area.
Acting on the call from Sheriff Wilcox, Intelligence Officer, Major Jesse Marcel was
sent by Col. William Blanchard, to investigate Mac Brazels story.
Marcel and Senior Counter Intelligence Corps (CIC) agent, Captain Sheridan Cavitt,
followed a rancher off-road to his place. They spent the night there and Marcel
inspected a large piece of debris that Brazel had dragged from the pasture.
Monday morning, July 7, 1947, Major Jesse Marcel took his first step onto the debris
field. Marcel would remark later that something... must have exploded above the
ground and fell. As Brazel, Cavitt and Marcel inspected the field, Marcel was able to
determine which direction it came from, and which direction it was heading. It was
in the pattern... you could tell where it started out and where it ended by how it was
thinned out...
According to Marcel, the debris was strewn over a wide area, I guess maybe threequarters of a mile long and a few hundred feet wide. Scattered in the debris were
small bits of metal that Marcel held a cigarette lighter to, to see if it would burn. I lit
the cigarette lighter to some of this stuff and it didnt burn, he said.
Along with the metal, Marcel described weightless I-beam-like structures that were
3/8 x , none of them very long, that would neither bend nor break. Some of these
I-beams had indecipherable characters along the length, in two colors. Marcel also
described metal debris the thickness of tin foil that was indestructible.
After gathering enough debris to fill his staff car, Maj. Marcel decided to stop by his
home on the way back to the base so that he could show his family the unusual debris.
Hed never seen anything quite like it. I didnt know what we were picking up. I still
dont know what it was...it could not have been part of an aircraft, not part of any kind
of weather balloon or experimental balloon...Ive seen rockets... sent up at the White
Sands Testing Grounds. It definitely was not part of an aircraft or missile or rocket.
Under hypnosis conducted by Dr. John Watkins in May of 1990, Jesse Marcel Jr.
remembered being awakened by his father that night and following him outside to
help carry in a large box filled with debris. Once inside, they emptied the contents of
the debris onto the kitchen floor.
39
Jesse Jr. described the lead foil and I-beams. Under hypnosis, he recalled the writing
on the I-beams as Purple. Strange. Never saw anything like it...Different geometric
shapes, leaves and circles. Under questioning, Jesse Jr. said the symbols were shiny
purple and they were small. There were many separate figures. This too, under
hypnosis: [Marcel Sr. was saying it was a flying saucer] I ask him what a flying
saucer is. I dont know what a flying saucer is...Its a ship. [Dads] excited!
At 11:00 A.M Walter Haut, public relations officer, finished the press release hed
been ordered to write, and gave copies of the release to the two radio stations and both
of the newspapers. By 2:26 P.M., the story was out on the AP Wire:
The Army Air Forces here today announced a flying disk had been
found
As calls began to pour into the base from all over the world, Lt. Robert Shirkey
watched as MPs carried loaded wreckage onto a C-54 from the First Transport Unit.
To get a better look, Shirkey stepped around Col. Blanchard, who was irritated with
all of the calls coming into the base. Blanchard decided to travel out to the debris field
and left instructions that hed gone on leave.
On the morning of July 8, Marcel reported what hed found to Col. Blanchard,
showing him pieces of the wreckage, none of which looked like anything Blanchard
had ever seen. Blanchard then sent Marcel to Carswell [Fort Worth Army Air Field]
to see General Ramey, Commanding Officer of the Eighth Air Force.
Marcel stated years later to Walter Haut that hed taken some of the debris into
Rameys office to show him what had been found. The material was displayed on
Rameys desk for the general when he returned.
Upon his return, General Ramey wanted to see the exact location of the debris field,
so he and Marcel went to the map room down the hall - but when they returned, the
wreckage that had been placed on the desk was gone and a weather balloon was
spread out on the floor. Major Charles A. Cashon took the now-famous photo of
Marcel with the weather balloon, in General Rameys office.
40
Jesse Marcel with the weather balloon.

As published in UFO Crash at Roswell
by Kevin D. Randle and Donald R. Schmitt.
(Photo courtesy of Fort Worth Star - Telegram Photographic Collection, Special
Collections division, University of Texas at Arlington Libraries)
It was then reported that General Ramey recognized the remains as part of a weather
balloon. Brigadier General Thomas DuBose, the chief of staff of the Eighth Air Force
said, [It] was a cover story. The whole balloon part of it. That was the part of the
story we were told to give to the public and news and that was it.
The military tried to convince the news media from that day forward that the object
found near Roswell was nothing more than a weather balloon.
July 9, as reports went out that the crashed object was actually a weather balloon,
clean-up crews were busily clearing the debris. Bud Payne, a rancher at Corona, was
trying to round up a stray when he was spotted by military and carried off the Foster
ranch, and Jud Roberts along with Walt Whitmore were turned away as they
approached the debris field.
As the wreckage was brought to the base, it was crated and stored in a hangar.
Back in town, Walt Whitmore and Lyman Strickland saw their friend, Mac Brazel,
who was being escorted to the Roswell Daily Record by three military officers. He
ignored Whitmore and Strickland, which was not at all like Mac, and once he got to
the Roswell Daily Record offices, he changed his story. He now claimed to have
found the debris on June 14. Brazel also mentioned that hed found weather
observation devices on two other occasions, but what he found this time was no
weather balloon.
Later that afternoon, an officer from the base retrieved all of the copies of Hauts
press release from the radio stations and newspaper offices.
The Las Vegas Review Journal, along with dozens of other newspapers, carried the
AP story:
Reports of flying saucers whizzing through the sky fell off sharply today as the army
and the navy began a concentrated campaign to stop the rumors.
The story also reported that AAF Headquarters in Washington had delivered a
blistering rebuke to officers at Roswell
41
Introduction to Chaos
The dictionary definition of chaos is turmoil,
turbulence, primordial abyss, and undesired
randomness, but scientists will tell you that chaos is
something extremely sensitive to initial conditions.
Chaos also refers to the question of whether or not it
is possible to make good long-term predictions about
how a system will act. A chaotic system can actually
develop in a way that appears very smooth and
ordered.
Determinism
Sir Isaac Newton
Determinism is the belief that every action

is the result of preceding actions. It began
as a philosophical belief in Ancient Greece
thousands of years ago and was
introduced into science around 1500 A.D.
with the idea that cause and effect rules
govern science. Sir Isaac Newton was
closely associated with the establishment
of determinism in modern science. His
laws were able to predict systems very
accurately. They were deterministic at
their core because they implied that
everything that would occur would be
based entirely on what happened right
before. The Newtonian model of the
universe is often depicted as a billiard
game in which the outcome unfolds
mathematically from the initial conditions
in a pre-determined fashion, like a movie
that can be run forwards or backwards in
time. Determinism remains as one of the
more important concepts of physical
science today.
Early Chaos
Ilya Prigogine showed that complex structures could come from simpler ones. This is
like order coming from chaos. Henry Adams previously described this with his quote
Chaos often breeds life, when order breeds habit. Henri Poincar was really the
Father of Chaos [Theory], however. The planet Neptune was discovered in 1846
and had been predicted from the observation of deviations in Uranus orbit. King
Oscar II of Norway was willing to give a prize to anyone who could prove or disprove
42
that the solar system was stable. Poincar offered his solution, but when a friend found
an error in his calculations, the prize was taken away until he could come up with a
new solution that worked. He found that there was no solution. Not even Sir Isaac
Newtons laws provided a solution to this huge problem. Poincar had been trying to
find order in a system where there was none to be found.
Edward Lorenz
During the 1960s Edward Lorenz was a
meteorologist at MIT working on a project
to simulate weather patterns on a
computer. He accidentally stumbled upon
the butterfly effect after deviations in
calculations off by thousandths greatly
changed the simulations. The Butterfly
Effect reflects how changes on the small
scale affect things on the large scale. It is
the classic example of chaos, as small
changes lead to large changes. An
example of this is how a butterfly flapping
its wings in Hong Kong could change
tornado patterns in Texas. Lorenz also
discovered the Lorenz Attractor, an area
that pulls points towards itself. He did so
during a 3D weather simulation.
The Lorenz Attractor
Chaos Theory
Chaos theory describes complex motion and the dynamics of sensitive systems.
Chaotic systems are mathematically deterministic but nearly impossible to predict.
Chaos is more evident in long-term systems than in short-term systems. Behavior in
chaotic systems is aperiodic, meaning that no variable describing the state of the
system undergoes a regular repetition of values. A chaotic system can actually evolve
in a way that appears to be smooth and ordered, however. Chaos refers to the issue of
whether or not it is possible to make accurate long-term predictions of any system if
the initial conditions are known to an accurate degree.
43
Chaotic systems, in this case a fractal, can appear to be smooth and ordered.
Initial Conditions
Chaos occurs when a system is very sensitive to initial conditions. Initial conditions
are the values of measurements at a given starting time. The phenomenon of chaotic
motion was considered a mathematical oddity at the time of its discovery, but now
physicists know that it is very widespread and may even be the norm in the universe.
The weather is an example of a chaotic system. In order to make long-term weather
forecasts it would be necessary to take an infinite number of measurements, which
would be impossible to do. Also, because the atmosphere is chaotic, tiny uncertainties
would eventually overwhelm any calculations and defeat the accuracy of the forecast.
The presence of chaotic systems in nature seems to place a limit on our ability to
apply deterministic physical laws to predict motions with any degree of certainty.
Chaos on the Large Scale

One of the most interesting issues in the study of chaotic systems is whether or not the
presence of chaos may actually produce ordered structures and patterns on a larger
scale. It has been found that the presence of chaos may actually be necessary for
larger scale physical patterns, such as mountains and galaxies, to arise. The presence
of chaos in physics is what gives the universe its arrow of time, the irreversible flow
from the past to the future. For centuries mathematicians and physicists have
overlooked dynamical systems as being random and unpredictable. The only systems
that could be understood in the past were those that were believed to be linear, but in
actuality, we do not live in a linear world at all. In this world linearity is incredibly
scarce. The reason physicists didnt know about and study chaos earlier is because the
computer is our telescope when studying chaos, and they didnt have computers or
anything that could carry out extremely complex calculations in minimal time. Now,
thanks to computers, we understand chaos a little bit more each and every day.
44
Instability
The definition of instability is a special
kind of behavior in time found in certain
physical systems. It is impossible to
measure to infinite precision, but until the
time of Poincar, the assumption was that
if you could shrink the uncertainty in the
initial conditions then any imprecision in
the prediction would shrink in the same
way. In reality, a tiny imprecision in the
initial conditions will grow at an enormous
rate. Two nearly indistinguishable sets of
initial conditions for the same system will
Chaotic systems are instable result in two final situations that differ
greatly from each other. This extreme
sensitivity to initial conditions is called
chaos. Equilibrium is very rare, and the
more complex a system is, there are more
disturbances that can threaten stability,
but conditions must be right to have an
upheaval.
Chaos in the Real World

In the real world, there are three very good examples of instability: disease, political
unrest, and family and community dysfunction. Disease is unstable because at any
moment there could be an outbreak of some deadly disease for which there is no cure.
This would cause terror and chaos. Political unrest is very unstable because people
can revolt, throw over the government and create a vast war. A war is another type of
a chaotic system. Family and community dysfunction is also unstable because if you
have a very tiny problem with a few people or a huge problem with many people, the
outcome will be huge with many people involved and many peoples lives in ruin.
Chaos is also found in systems as complex as electric circuits, measles outbreaks,
lasers, clashing gears, heart rhythms, electrical brain activity, circadian rhythms,
fluids, animal populations, and chemical reactions, and in systems as simple as the
pendulum. It also has been thought possibly to occur in the stock market.
45
Populations are chaotic, constantly fluctuating, and their graphs can turn out to
resemble fractals.
Complexity
Complexity can occur in natural and man-made systems, as well as in social structures
and human beings. Complex dynamical systems may be very large or very small, and
in some complex systems, large and small components live cooperatively. A complex
system is neither completely deterministic nor completely random and it exhibits both
characteristics. The causes and effects of the events that a complex system
experiences are not proportional to each other. The different parts of complex systems
are linked and affect one another in a synergistic manner. There is positive and
negative feedback in a complex system. The level of complexity depends on the
character of the system, its environment, and the nature of the interactions between
them. Complexity can also be called the edge of chaos. When a complex dynamical
chaotic system because unstable, an attractor (such as those ones the Lorenz invented)
draws the stress and the system splits. This is called bifurication. The edge of chaos is
the stage when the system could carry out the most complex computations. In daily
life we see complexity in traffic flow, weather changes, population changes,
organizational behavior, shifts in public opinion, urban development, and epidemics.
Fractals
Fractals are geometric shapes that are very
complex and infinitely detailed. You can zoom
in on a section and it will have just as much
detail as the whole fractal. They are
recursively defined and small sections of
them are similar to large ones. One way to
think of fractals for a function f(x) is to
consider x, f(x), f(f(x)), f(f(f(x))),
f(f(f(f(x)))), etc. Fractals are related to chaos
because they are complex systems that have
definite properties.
Fractals are recursively
defined and infinitely
46
detailed
Benoit Mandelbrot
Benoit Mandelbrot
Benoit Mandelbrot was a Poland-born

French mathematician who greatly
advanced fractals. When he was young,
his father showed him the Julia set of
fractals; he was not greatly interested in
fractals at the time but in the 1970s, he
became interested again and he greatly
improved upon them, laying out the
foundation for fractal geometry. He also
advanced fractals by showing that fractals
cannot be treated as whole-number
dimensions; they must instead have
fractional dimensions. Benoit Mandelbrot
believed that fractals were found nearly
everywhere in nature, at places such as
coastlines, mountains, clouds, aggregates,
and galaxy clusters. He currently works at
IBMs Watson Research Center and is a
professor at Yale University. He has been
awarded the Barnard Medal for
Meritorious Service to Science, the
Franklin Medal, the Alexander von
Humboldt Prize, the Nevada Medal, and
the Steinmetz Medal for his works.
Sierpinskis Triangle
Sierpinskis Triangle is a great example of a fractal, and one of the simplest ones. It is
recursively defined and thus has infinite detail. It starts as a triangle and every new
iteration of it creates a triangle with the midpoints of the other triangles of it.
Sierpinskis Triangle has an infinite number of triangles in it.
47
The first recursion of Sierpinskis

Triangle
The second recursion of Sierpinskis

Triangle
The third recursion of Sierpinskis

Triangle
The fourth recursion of Sierpinskis

Triangle
Koch Snowflake
The Koch Snowflake is another good example of a fractal. It starts as a triangle and
adds on triangles to its trisection points that point outward for all infinity. This causes
it to look like a snowflake after a few iterations.
The Koch Snowflake
48
Mandelbrot Set
The Mandelbrot fractal set is the simplest nonlinear function, as it is defined
recursively as f(x)=x^2+c. After plugging f(x) into x several times, the set is equal to
all of the expressions that are generated. The plots below are a time series of the set,
meaning that they are the plots for a specific c. They help to demonstrate the theory of
chaos, as when c is -1.1, -1.3, and -1.38 it can be expressed as a normal, mathematical
function, whereas for c = -1.9 you cant. In other words, when c is -1.1, -1.3, and 1.38 the function is deterministic, whereas when c = -1.9 the function is chaotic.
Time Series for c = -1.1

Complex Fractals
When changing the values for the Mandelbrot fractal set from lines to geometric
shapes that depend on the various values, a much more complicated picture arises.
You can also change the type of system that you use when graphing the fractals and
the types of sets that you use in order to generate increasingly complex fractals. The
following fractals are very mathematically complex:
49
Mandelbrot Set Fractal
Julia Set Fractal
50
Julia Set Fractals
Chaos Theory and Fractal Links
Chaos Theory and Fractal Phenomena: An interesting essay by

Manus J. Donahue III that has been cited in The New York Times. Contains
interesting information on what chaos theory and fractals are and about their
history.
Chaos Theory Overview: A very thorough description about the
history of chaos, instability, the strange attractor, phase transition, deep chaos,
and self organization.
Fractal Geometry of the Mandelbrot Set: A mathematical
description about how fractals, particularly the Mandelbrot and Julia Sets, are
generated.
What is Chaos: An introductory overview about chaos concerning what
determinism, initial conditions, uncertainty, dynamic instabilities, and some
manifestations in nature of chaos are.
An Introduction to Chaos Theory and Fractal Geometry

Author: Manus J. Donahue III
Copyright Fall 1997, all rights reserved.
Physicists like to think that all you have to do is say, these are the conditions,
now what happens next? -Richard P. Feynman
The world of mathematics has been confined to the linear world for centuries. That is
to say, mathematicians and physicists have overlooked dynamical systems as random
and unpredictable. The only systems that could be understood in the past were those
that were believed to be linear, that is to say, systems that follow predictable patterns
and arrangements. Linear equations, linear functions, linear algebra, linear
programming, and linear accelerators are all areas that have been understood and
mastered by the human race. However, the problem arises that we humans do not live
in an even remotely linear world; in fact, our world should indeed be categorized as
nonlinear; hence, proportion and linearity is scarce. How may one go about pursuing
and understanding a nonlinear system in a world that is confined to the easy, logical
linearity of everything? This is the question that scientists and mathematicians
51
became burdened with in the 19th Century; hence, a new science and mathematics was
derived: chaos theory.
The very name chaos theory seems to contradict reason, in fact it seems somewhat
of an oxymoron. The name chaos theory leads the reader to believe that
mathematicians have discovered some new and definitive knowledge about utterly
random and incomprehensible phenomena; however, this is not entirely the case. The
acceptable definition of chaos theory states, chaos theory is the qualitative study of
unstable aperiodic behavior in deterministic nonlinear dynamical systems. A
dynamical system may be defined to be a simplified model for the time-varying
behavior of an actual system, and aperiodic behavior is simply the behavior that
occurs when no variable describing the state of the system undergoes a regular
repetition of values. Aperiodic behavior never repeats and it continues to manifest the
effects of any small perturbation; hence, any prediction of a future state in a given
system that is aperiodic is impossible. Assessing the idea of aperiodic behavior to a
relevant example, one may look at human history. History is indeed aperiodic since
broad patterns in the rise and fall of civilizations may be sketched; however, no events
ever repeat exactly. What is so incredible about chaos theory is that unstable aperiodic
behavior can be found in mathematically simply systems. These very simple
mathematical systems display behavior so complex and unpredictable that it is
acceptable to merit their descriptions as random.
An interesting question arises from many skeptics concerning why chaos has just
recently been noticed. If chaotic systems are so mandatory to our every day life, how
come mathematicians have not studied chaos theory earlier? The answer can be given
in one word: computers. The calculations involved in studying chaos are repetitive,
boring and number in the millions. No human is stupid enough to endure the
boredom; however, a computer is always up to the challenge. Computers have always
been known for their excellence at mindless repetition; hence, the computer is our
telescope when studying chaos. For, without a doubt, one cannot really explore chaos
without a computer.
Before advancing into the more precocious and advanced areas of chaos, it is
necessary to touch on the basic principle that adequately describes chaos theory, the
Butterfly Effect. The Butterfly Effect was vaguely understood centuries ago and is
still satisfactorily portrayed in folklore:
For want of a nail, the shoe was lost;
For want of a shoe, the horse was lost;
For want of a horse, the rider was lost;
For want of a rider, the battle was lost;
For want of a battle, the kingdom was lost!
Small variations in initial conditions result in huge, dynamic transformations in
concluding events. That is to say that there was no nail, and, therefore, the kingdom
was lost. The graphs of what seem to be identical, dynamic systems appear to diverge
as time goes on until all resemblance disappears.
Perhaps the most identifiable symbol linked with the Butterfly Effect is the famed
Lorenz Attractor. Edward Lorenz, a curious meteorologist, was looking for a way to
52
model the action of the chaotic behavior of a gaseous system. Hence, he took a few
equations from the physics field of fluid dynamics, simplified them, and got the
following three-dimensional system:
dx/dt=delta*(y-x)
dy/dt=r*x-y-x*z
dz/dt=x*y-b*z
Delta represents the Prandtl number, the ratio of the fluid viscosity of a substance to
its thermal conductivity; however, one does not have to know the exact value of this
constant; hence, Lorenz simply used 10. The variable r represents the difference in
temperature between the top and bottom of the gaseous system. The variable b is
the width to height ratio of the box which is being used to hold the gas in the gaseous
system. Lorenz used 8/3 for this variable. The resultant x of the equation represents
the rate of rotation of the cylinder, y represents the difference in temperature at
opposite sides of the cylinder, and the variable z represents the deviation of the
system from a linear, vertical graphed line representing temperature. If one were to
plot the three differential equations on a three-dimensional plane, using the help of a
computer of course, no geometric structure or even complex curve would appear;
instead, a weaving object known as the Lorenz Attractor appears. Because the system
never exactly repeats itself, the trajectory never intersects itself. Instead it loops
around forever. I have included a computer animated Lorenz Attractor which is quite
similar to the production of Lorenz himself. The following Lorenz Attractor was
generated by running data through a 4th-order Runge-Kutta fixed-timestep integrator
with a step of .0001, printing every 100th data point. It ran for 100 seconds, and only
took the last 4096 points. The original parameters were a =16, r =45, and b = 4 for the
following equations (similar to the original Lorenz equations):
x=a(y-x)
y=rx-y-xz
z=xy-bz
The initial position of the projectory was (8,8,14). When the points were generated
and graphed, the Lorenz Attractor was produced in 3-D:
53
The attractor will continue weaving back and forth between the two wings, its motion
seemingly random, its very action mirroring the chaos which drives the process.
Lorenz had obviously made an immense breakthrough in not only chaos theory, but
life. Lorenz had proved that complex, dynamical systems show order, but they never
repeat. Since our world is classified as a dynamical, complex system, our lives, our
weather, and our experiences will never repeat; however, they should form patterns.
Lorenz, not quite convinced with his results, did a follow-up experiment in order to
support his previous conclusions. Lorenz established an experiment that was quite
simple; it is known today as the Lorenzian Waterwheel. Lorenz took a waterwheel; it
had about eight buckets spaced evenly around its rim with a small hole at the bottom
of each . The buckets were mounted on swivels, similar to Ferris-wheel seats, so that
the buckets would always point upwards. The entire system was placed under a
waterspout. A slow, constant stream of water was propelled from the waterspout;
hence, the waterwheel began to spin at a fairly constant rate. Lorenz decided to
increase the flow of water, and, as predicted in his Lorenz Attractor, an interesting
phenomena arose. The increased velocity of the water resulted in a chaotic motion for
the waterwheel. The waterwheel would revolve in one direction as before, but then it
would suddenly jerk about and revolve in the opposite direction. The filling and
emptying of the buckets was no longer synchronized; the system was now chaotic.
Lorenz observed his mysterious waterwheel for hours, and, no matter how long he
recorded the positions and contents of the buckets, there was never and instance
54
where the waterwheel was in the same position twice. The waterwheel would
continue on in chaotic behavior without ever repeating any of its previous conditions.
A graph of the waterwheel would resemble the Lorenz Attractor.
Now it may be accepted from Lorenz and his comrades that our world is indeed
linked with an eery form of chaos. Chaos and randomness are no longer ideas of a
hypothetical world; they are quite realistic here in the status quo. A basis for chaos is
established in the Butterfly Effect, the Lorenz Attractor, and the Lorenz Waterwheel;
therefore, there must be an immense world of chaos beyond the rudimentary
fundamentals. This new form mentioned is highly complex, repetitive, and replete
with intrigue.
I coined fractal from the Latin adjective fractus. The corresponding Latin verb
frangere means to break: to create irregular fragments. It is therefore
sensible-and how appropriate for our needs!-that, in addition to fragmented,
fractus should also mean irregular, both meanings being preserved in
fragment. -Benoit Mandelbrot
The extending and folding of chaotic systems give strange attractors, such as the
Lorenz Attractor, the distinguishing characteristic of a nonintegral dimension. This
nonintegral dimension is most commonly referred to as a fractal dimension. Fractals
appear to be more popular in the status quo for their aesthetic nature than they are for
their mathematics. Everyone who has seen a fractal has admired the beauty of a
colorful, fascinating image, but what is the formula that makes up this glitzy image?
The classical Euclidean geometry that one learns in school is quite different than the
fractal geometry mainly because fractal geometry concerns nonlinear, nonintegral
systems while Euclidean geometry is mainly oriented around linear, integral systems.
Hence, Euclidean geometry is a description of lines, ellipses, circles, etc. However,
fractal geometry is a description of algorithms. There are two basic properties that
constitute a fractal. First, is self-similarity, which is to say that most magnified images
of fractals are essentially indistinguishable from the unmagnified version. A fractal
shape will look almost, or even exactly, the same no matter what size it is viewed at.
This repetitive pattern gives fractals their aesthetic nature. Second, as mentioned
earlier, fractals have non-integer dimensions. This means that they are entirely
different from the graphs of lines and conic sections that we have learned about in
fundamental Euclidean geometry classes. By taking the midpoints of each side of an
equilateral triangle and connecting them together, one gets an interesting fractal
known as the Sierpenski Triangle. The iterations are repeated an infinite number or
times and eventually a very simple fractal arises:
55
In addition to the famous Sierpenski Triangle, the Koch Snowflake is also a well
noted, simple fractal image. To construct a Koch Snowflake, begin with a triangle
with sides of length 1. At the middle of each side, add a new triangle one-third the
size; and repeat this process for an infinite amount of iterations. The length of the
boundary is 3 X 4/3 X 4/3 X 4/3...-infinity. However, the area remains less than the
area of a circle drawn around the original triangle. What this means is that an
infinitely long line surrounds a finite area. The end construction of a Koch Snowflake
resembles the coastline of a shore.
The two fundamental fractals that I have included provided a basis for much more
complex, elaborate fractals. Two of the leading reasearchers in the field of fractals
were Gaston Maurice Julia and Benoit Mandelbrot. Their discoveries and
breakthroughs will be discussed next.
On February 3rd, 1893, Gaston Maurice Julia was born in Sidi Bel Abbes, Algeria.
Julia was injured while fighting in World War I and was forced to wear a leather strap
across his face for the rest of his life in order to protect and cover his injury. he spent
a large majority of his life in hospitals; therefore, a lot of his mathematical research
took place in the hospital. At the age of 25, Julia published a 199 page masterpiece
entitled Memoire sur literation des fonctions. The paper dealt with the iteration of a
rational function. With the publication of this paper came his claim to fame. Julia
spent his life studying the iteration of polynomials and rational functions. If f(x) is a
function, various behaviors arise when f is iterated or repeated. If one were to start
with a particular value for x, say x=a, then the following would result:
a, f(a), f(f(a)), f(f(f(a))), etc.
Repeatedly applying f to a yields arbitrarily large values. Hence, the set of
numbers is partitioned into two parts, and the Julia set associated to f is the
boundary between the two sets. The filled Julia set includes those numbers x=a for
which the iterates of f applied to a remain bounded. The following fractals belong
to the Julia set.
56
Julia became famous around the 1920s; however, upon his demise, he was essentially
forgotten. It was not until 1970 that the work of Gaston Maurice Julia was revived and
popularized by Polish born Benoit Mandelbrot.
Clouds are not spheres, mountains are not cones, coastlines are not circles, and
bark is not smooth, nor does lightning travel in a straight line. -Benoit
Mandelbrot
Benoit Mandelbrot was born in Poland in 1924. When he was 12 his family emigrated
to France and his uncle, Szolem Mandelbrot, took responsibility for his education. It
is said that Mandelbrot was not very successful in his schooling; in fact, he may have
never learned his multiplication tables. When Benoit was 21, his uncle showed him
Julias important 1918 paper concerning fractals. Benoit was not overly impressed
with Julias work, and it was not until 1977 that Benoit became interested in Julias
discoveries. Eventually, with the aid of computer graphics, Mandelbrot was able to
show how Julias work was a source of some of the most beautiful fractals known
today. The Mandelbrot set is made up of connected points in the complex plane. The
simple equation that is the basis of the Mandelbrot set is included below.
changing number + fixed number = Result
In order to calculate points for a Mandelbrot fractal, start with one of the numbers on
the complex plane and put its value in the Fixed Number slot of the equation. In the
Changing number slot, start with zero. Next, calculate the equation. Take the
number obtained as the result and plug it into the Changing number slot. Now,
repeat (iterate) this operation an infinite number or times. When iterative equations
are applied to points in a certain region of the complex plane, a fractal from the
Mandelbrot set results. A few fractals from the Mandelbrot set are included below.
57
Benoit Mandelbrot currently works at IBMs Watson Research Center. In addition, he

is a Professor of the Practice of Mathematics at Harvard University. He has been
awarded the Barnard Medal for Meritorious Service to Science, the Franklin Medal,
the Alexander von Humboldt Prize, the Nevada Medal, and the Steinmetz Medal. His
work with fractals has truly influenced our world immensely.
It is now established that fractals are quite real and incredible; however, what do these
newly discovered objects have to do with real life? Is there a purpose behind these
fascinating images? The answer is a somewhat surprising yes. Homer Smith, a
computer engineer of Art Matrix, once said, If you like fractals, it is because you are
made of them. If you cant stand fractals, its because you cant stand yourself.
Fractals make up a large part of the biological world. Clouds, arteries, veins, nerves,
parotid gland ducts, and the bronchial tree all show some type of fractal organization.
In addition, fractals can be found in regional distribution of pulmonary blood flow,
pulmonary alveolar structure, regional myocardial blood flow heterogeneity, surfaces
of proteins, mammographic parenchymal pattern as a risk for breast cancer, and in the
distribution of arthropod body lengths. Understanding and mastering the concepts that
govern fractals will undoubtedly lead to breakthroughs in the area of biological
understanding. Fractals are one of the most interesting branches of chaos theory, and
they are beginning to become ever more key in the world of biology and medicine.
George Cantor, a nineteenth century mathematician, became fascinated by the infinite
number of points on a line segment. Cantor began to wonder what would happen
when and infinite number of line segments were removed from an initial line interval.
Cantor devised an example which portrayed classical fractals made by iteratively
taking away something. His operation created a dust of points; hence, the name
Cantor Dust. In order to understand Cantor Dust, start with a line; remove the middle
third; then remove the middle third of the remaining segments; and so on. The
operation is shown below.
The Cantor set is simply the dust of points that remain. The number of these points
are infinite, but their total length is zero. Mandelbrot saw the Cantor set as a model for
the occurerence of errors in an electronic transmission line. Engineers saw periods of
errorless transmission, mixed with periods when errors would come in gusts. When
these gusts of errors were analyzed, it was determined that they contained error-free
periods within them. As the transmissions were analyzed to smaller and smaller
degrees, it was determined that such dusts, as in the Cantor Dust, were indispensable
in modeling intermittency.
Its an experience like no other experience I can describe, the best thing that
can happen to a scientist, realizing that something thats happened in his or her
mind exactly corresponds to something that happens in nature. Its startling
every time it occurs. One is surprised that a construct of ones own mind can
58
actually be realized in the honest-to-goodness world out there. A great shock,

and a great, great joy. -Leo Kadanoff
The fractals and iterations are fun to look at; the Cantor Dust and Koch Snowflakes
are fun to think about, but what breakthroughs can be made in terms of discovery? Is
chaos theory anything more than a new way of thinking? The future of chaos theory is
unpredictable, but if a breakthrough is made, it will be huge. However, miniature
discoveries have been made in the field of chaos within the past century or so, and, as
expected, they are mind boggling.
The first consumer product to exploit chaos theory was produced in 1993 by Goldstar
Co. in the form of a revolutionary washing machine. A chaotic washing machine? The
washing machine is based on the principle that there are identifiable and predictable
movements in nonlinear systems. The new washing machine was designed to produce
cleaner and less tangled clothes. The key to the chaotic cleaning process can be found
in a small pulsator that rises and falls randomly as the main pulsator rotates. The new
machine was surprisingly successful. However, Daewoo, a competitor of Goldstar
claims that they first started commercializing chaos theory in their bubble machine
which was released in 1990. The bubble machine was the first to use the
revolutionary fuzzy logic circuits. These circuits are capable of making choices
between zero and one, and between true and false. Hence, the fuzzy logic circuits
are responsible for controlling the amount of bubbles, the turbulence of the machine,
and even the wobble of the machine. Indeed, chaos theory is very much a factor in
todays consumer world market.
The stock markets are said to be nonlinear, dynamic systems. Chaos theory is the
mathematics of studying such nonlinear, dynamic systems. Does this mean that
chaoticians can predict when stocks will rise and fall? Not quite; however, chaoticians
have determined that the market prices are highly random, but with a trend. The stock
market is accepted as a self-similar system in the sense that the individual parts are
related to the whole. Another self-similar system in the area of mathematics are
fractals. Could the stock market be associated with a fractal? Why not? In the market
price action, if one looks at the market monthly, weekly, daily, and intra day bar
charts, the structure has a similar appearance. However, just like a fractal, the stock
market has sensitive dependence on initial conditions. This factor is what makes
dynamic market systems so difficult to predict. Because we cannot accurately
describe the current situation with the detail necessary, we cannot accurately predict
the state of the system at a future time. Stock market success can be predicted by
chaoticians. Short-term investing, such as intra day exchanges are a waste of time.
Short-term traders will fail over time due to nothing more than the cost of trading.
However, over time, long-term price action is not random. Traders can succeed
trading from daily or weekly charts if they follow the trends. A system can be random
in the short-term and deterministic in the long term.
Perhaps even more important than stock market chaos and predictability is solar
system chaos. Astronomers and cosmologists have known for quite some time that the
solar system does not run with the precision of a Swiss watch. Inabilities occur in
the motions of Saturns moon Hyperion, gaps in the asteroid belt between Mars and
Jupiter, and in the orbit of the planets themselves. For centuries astronomers tried to
compare the solar system to a gigantic clock around the sun; however, they found that
59
their equations never actually predicted the real planets movement. It is easy to
understand how two bodies will revolve around a common center of gravity.
However, what happens when a third, fourth, fifth or infinite number of gravitational
attractions are introduced? The vectors become infinite and the system becomes
chaotic. This prevents a definitive analytical solution to the equations of motion. Even
with the advanced computers that we have today, the long term calculations are far
too lengthy. Stephen Hawking once said, If we find the answer to that (the universe),
it would be the ultimate triumph of human reason-for then we would know the mind
of God.
The applications of chaos theory are infinite; seemingly random systems produce
patterns of spooky understandable irregularity. From the Mandelbrot set to turbulence
to feedback and strange attractors; chaos appears to be everywhere. Breakthroughs
have been made in the past in the area chaos theory, and, in order to achieve any more
colossal accomplishments in the future, they must continue to be made.
Understanding chaos is understanding life as we know it.
However, if we do discover a complete theory, it should in time be
understandable in broad principle by everyone, not just a few scientists. Then we
shall all, philosophers, scientists, and just ordinary people, be able to take part in
the discussion of the question of why it is that we and the universe exist.
-Stephen Hawking
information abound on the Internet, especially for those who want to know more
about fractals. But there is so much more than fractals to share with your students. I
have included some of those sites I found most informative, but some are very
technical. These may augment your knowledge without necessitating a course in
Chaos at the local university.
This site has been designed to offer educators a course in Chaos Theory and Fractal
Geometry. The course encompasses the following topics:
The mathematics and history of Chaos Theory
The mathematics of fractal, including fractal generators for

students to create their own fractals
Mandelbrot and Julia sets
Iterations and recursions

Dynamical systems and how they relate to real world situations
Graphing non-linear equations and the creation of strange
attractors
Measurement and Scale
This course offers text, relevant web sites, interactive Internet activities to reinforce
concepts, and proposals for research topics and presentation modes for students. It is
hoped that student projects may be presented for future students to use as models. The
course is designed for high school students with a knowledge of Algebra. However,
there are links to a number of sites that may be used for younger students.
Teacher Support:
60
links to web sites that cover advanced topics in Chaos Theory

and Fractal Geometry . These sites are marked by an asterisk.
There is very little offered in traditional texts on these
subjects, so please feel free to use this course or portions to
augment your own offerings to students.
The Math-Ed listserv

message board at Making Order Out of Chaos Website
Online Text
: Exploring Chaos and Fractals.
NCTM strands covered:
discrete math
measurement
patterns and functions
logic and language
Goals:
to familiarize students and teachers with the following concepts and
skills:
graphing non-linear equations,

iterations and feedback loops,
mathematics as an experimental science,
infinite perimeters in a finite space,
application of the principles of Chaos in real-life situations.
The Herman Ring Formula

Page One of Ten
Skip the Math

Ever since I was a small child I knew the Sullivan Classification by heart. It describes
all of the possible kinds of attractor in a chaotic rational mapping of complex
numbers. Those possibilities are:
1. An attracting fixed point or cycle.
61
2. A parabolic fixed point or cycle.

3. A Siegel disk or a cycle of these.
4. A Herman ring or a cycle of these.
I was familiar with quadratic Julia sets involving the first three from experimentation
with the Mandelbrot set.
Attracting point
Parabolic point on the verge of

becoming 7
Siegel disk
Attracting 3-cycle
Parabolic 3-cycle on the verge

of becoming 9
Cycle of 2 Siegel disks
Fractint PAR file for replicating these images.

The Herman ring does not appear in the Mandelbrot set, or indeed in any polynomial.
I had experimented for years with numerous rational functions and had never seen
anything I didnt recognize as one of the three cases outlined above.
One day last fall (1997) I decided I just had to have some Herman rings, and so I
logged onto the university library computer and input a search for Herman ring.
Nada. I tried Complex mappings and got a few titles... including an obscure
Springer Verlag published title whose name and description looked promising. I
tracked it down to a dusty corner of the basement on a shelf full of arcane
mathematical texts. An illustration of a quadratic Julia set on the front cover told me I
was on the right track. I popped open the book at the back and found the index, then
the h, and then Herman ring. Two pages referenced. I checked the second, and
found nothing of interest except a recap of the Sullivan classification, which I already
knew. I checked the first of the pages, and I was damned if I didnt see near the
bottom of the page an orbit plot and near the top a mathematical equation. That
equation was, in fact, a rational mapping with Herman rings. I pulled out my note
binder and a pencil and wrote down the formula. I plugged it into Fractint that very
night, and the rest, as they say, is history.
62
The equation: z ->

The formula proved to be a real treat. It has a fascinating and complex fourdimensional Mandelbrot set (owing to the two parameters), lovely Julia sets, and
provides many amazing vistas the likes of which Id never seen before. About the
only thing it wont do is produce a cycle of Herman rings. The Julia sets always have
an attractor at infinity and another at zero, and most of my Julia images show distinct
color schemes for the two basins.
There are two critical points in this formula, which produce two congruent, mirror
image quadratic Mandelbrots...usually. If one fixes c = 3 or c = -3 and looks at the aplane, one sees a cubic Mandelbrot set, because the
critical points, which depend on c, coincide and thus
there is a single critical point with multiplicity two.
(This also happens for c = 1 or c = -1, but for these and
c = 0, the formula reduces to raising z to some power
and multiplying by a, and the set reduces to the unit
circle, which is rather boring.)
Fractint Formula File

Fractint PAR File (Requires Formula File)
NOTE: These formulas require Fractint version 19.6 or later to function! (With others
on this site you may get away with using older versions of Fractint; not so with these
ones.)
Herman Ring
Look ma! A Herman Ring!
Rubies
63
A
gorg
eous
Julia
set.
Herman Mandelbrot
A slice of the Mandelbrot set.
Herman Mandelbrot 2
An orthogonal slice of the Mandelbrot set.
Notice how both Mandelbrot views show thin black lines with buds in mirror image
pairs on either side? I was soon to discover that this was characteristic of regions of an
M-set where Herman rings occur.
64
The Quartz Formula

Page One of Seven
I was playing around with formulas recently when I decided to try a certain quartic
mapping with two parameters. I am still astonished daily by the sheer variety of the
fractals it produces. The equation is zn+1=b(3zn4-4zn3-6zn2+12zn)+c where b and c are
complex parameters and z is a complex number. The seeming simplicity of this
equation is belied by the complex fractal Julia sets that depend on the values of a and
b chosen, and the two four-dimensional Mandelbrot sets. One of the Mandelbrot sets
has minibrots like z2+c, the other has minibrots like z3+c.
The images in the six pages below are various Julia sets and zooms of slices of the
two Mandelbrot sets. The variety of these images is astonishing. In no other fractal
have I discovered mushrooms for instance...
Fractint Formula File

Fractint PAR File (Requires Formula File)
Sprennet
These peculiar plants grow only on the underside of an
overhanging cliff in a certain forest of Quartz World.
Symbol
This is the symbol of the Spiral Clan.
65
Ho
t
Spi
rals
Spirals of hot dust after an asteroid collision.
FreakyPhant
These mutant elephants carry two kinds of spiral.
The Nature of Fractals
What are fractals ?

The word fractal comes from the Latin word fractus or broken. That is why fractals
are examples of irregular shapes that appear the same whatever the scale level. Now,
to us everyday people the above is about as clear as mud. Here is an example; take a
simple triangle, on each side add a smaller triangle whose base is one third the length
of the side on which it is being placed. Then continue the process on each side of the
resulting star, each time adding a triangle with a base of one third the length of the
side it is placed on. The resulting figure is a Koch Snowflake an example of a regular
fractal.
The Koch Snowflake
66
Types of Fractals
There are two main types of fractals, regular fractals like the Koch snowflake and
random fractals. Regular fractals, sometimes given the name geometric fractals are
the same on all scales, apart, of course, from size. Random fractals on the other hand
differ slightly between levels. However, all levels are mathematically related. This, of
course, being the reason they are still considered fractals.
This page last updated by CS, March 27, 2006.
The Nature of Fractals
What are fractals ?

The word fractal comes from the Latin word fractus or broken. That is why fractals
are examples of irregular shapes that appear the same whatever the scale level. Now,
to us everyday people the above is about as clear as mud. Here is an example; take a
simple triangle, on each side add a smaller triangle whose base is one third the length
67
of the side on which it is being placed. Then continue the process on each side of the
resulting star, each time adding a triangle with a base of one third the length of the
side it is placed on. The resulting figure is a Koch Snowflake an example of a regular
fractal.
The Koch Snowflake
Types of Fractals
There are two main types of fractals, regular fractals like the Koch snowflake and
random fractals. Regular fractals, sometimes given the name geometric fractals are
the same on all scales, apart, of course, from size. Random fractals on the other hand
differ slightly between levels. However, all levels are mathematically related. This, of
course, being the reason they are still considered fractals.
This page last updated by CS, March 27, 2006.

Laser DNA
PhysicsWeb, 25 2002
-
DNA .
Ken Hirano
68
DNA
, ,
. ,
DNA ,
( Hirano 2002 Appl. Phys. Lett. 80 515).
(
) DNA.

, .
Hirano
, , ,
DNA, 40 m .
DNA, 600 milliwatt
.
-
200 nanometres - ,
. DNA,

. DNA
.
,

. Hirano
, (assembly)
(micromachines).

DNA , Hirano,
.
80 Friedman-Lemaitre
, 2002
18 ,
. O Alexandr Friedmann,
,

.
Alexandr Friedmann , ,
1888 1928. ,
1922
(...).
.
Friedmann .., ,
. Friedman, .

.
.
Friedmann . Friedmann
. , . ,

. ,
- - .
69
-
, .
Friedmann, ,
. ( )
.
, . - , .
( ),
.
Friedmann,
. , vr Friedmann ,
Einstein
.
.
Friedmann 1925 ( ).
, Friedmann, ,
.
, 1927, , , , George Lemaitre,
Einstein Friedmann ( ),
.
Lemaitre, 1894,
. Lemaitre
, , .
- ,
Lemaitre , 1931.
Friedman Lemaitre 1920,
.
, Lemaitre Friedman,
Einstein, 1930,
.
.
-
, .
Lemaitre
, 30
, .
, , , .

.
Hubble, 1929, Gamov 1927,
.

. .

,
. . ,
70
Einstein-Sitter.
(Big Bang), Friedman
Lemaitre. Einstein-De Sitter , Gamov
,
.
1966
Friedman-Lemaitre.
: (Steven Weinberg), (John Gribbin).
Big Bang;
Big Bang
. Big Bang
,
, .
:
Olbers.
Hubble
, Hubble (1929)
.
-
.
-
1 100.000.
supernova.
Big Bang (
Sitter, Friedmann, Gamov, Lemaitre)
( Bondi, Gold, Hoyle),
Big Bang .
- quasar .
(CMB),
2,7 .
, .
TCMB .
.
2D, 3He -3, 4He -4, 7Li -7
. 3 .
, CMB
,
Big Bang
.
*
.

.
Olbers
( ),
( )

( ).
71
- Big Bang;
, 2002
, ,
. , ,
.
Big Bang, 50
, .
, ,
, ,
, , ,
( ).
, branes ,
, .
( ).
, quarks, , ,
, . ,
.
,
-
.
, 2001,
- .
Neil Turok , Burt Ovrut , Paul
Steinhardt Justin Khoury Princeton.

. ,
, ,
.
, 11-, 5
. 6
11 ,
, .
1 4, , 5 .
, 5 , 5
, . ,
.
4- ,
;
, . 5, , , , Big Bang.
, Big Bang brane () 5 ,

, ,
.
, , ,
.
72
, branes, 5 , ,
, .
, .
, Big Bang,
, Big Bang.
:
. ,
,
,
, .
Big Bang,
.
Mario Livio,
, , ,
. .
,
( ).
, .
,
, .
. , ,
. , , , ,
brane () , , .
,
, .
, : ,
;
, ;
,
. .
, Burt Ovrut, . .
(brane), , .
, ,
, .
, Ovrut, , ,
(branes). .
,
() . brane
. branes, , ,
.
, ,
73
, Ovrut.
1.
5
.
3.
5
.
2.

,

5 .
4.

,
. ,
Big Bang.
.
, , .
,
, ,
( ),
.
, ,
20 .
, .
, , .
, ,
.
(branes),
, Big Bang.
( ),
.
Turner, ,
.
.
.

Bing Bang , ,
, 15
.
74
, ,
- ,
,
,
.
Big Bang,
, .
Big Bang, - ,
11 ,
.
, 80 Alan Guth ( MIT),
Andre Linde ( ), Andreas Albrecht (UC ) Steinhardt,
,
, .
, .
.
. (
) ( ),
. , :

.
(CMB).
, ,
quarks, , , ..
. ,
().
.
, Big Bang
. toy Einstein,
. ,
,

.
:

, ,
, . ,
,
.

( ).

, ,
.

Oskar Klein () 1920
.
George Uhlenbeck ( ) and
Samuel Goudsmit 1926 Leiden,
.
75
, .
. ,
10 11 . 90, Petr Horava ( Rutgers) Ed Witten ( Princeton)
, ,
. ,
Calabi-Yau.
,
( )
. ,
-, Andre Lukas ( ),Ovrut Dan Waldram (
Mary Westfield ). Horava-Witten -,

.
.
.
. ,
- ,
.
branes, .
Big Bang ,
brane .
, ,
. 15 ,
.

. ,
quarks, , , ,
. ,
.

,
-
. ,

,
.
,
.
, 15
, ,
Big Bang.
, ,
,
.
, Big Bang ,
, ,
Mario Livio ,
.
76

,
,
Livio. Mario Livio

, .

, , Alan H.
Guth ,
.
. Bang
, Bang
Big Bang.
,

. , Big Bang
, .
, , ,
, Paul J. Steinhardt
Princeton.
1020 . ,
bang
.
, ,
, .
Big Bang.
,

. ,
.
, Burt . Ovrut
.

.
, .
Steinhardt Ovrut, Justin Khoury Princeton Neil
Turok DAMTP ,
(ekpyrotic) , .
;
;
, ,
Big Bang

.
Big Bang
20. ,
77
.
,
. ,
, , ,
Steinhardt. , Big Bang

.
,
, ,

.
1980, Guth Big Bang
.
2 , Guth

,
.
10 -32 ,
100 ,

. :
-
-
.
,
.
.

. ,

. ,

.
Big Bang
,
,
.
-
.
,
, . , Steinhardt,

.

, .
78

, Steinhardt,
,
. , ,
,
.
Oskar Klein () 1920

.
George Uhlenbeck ( ) and
Samuel Goudsmit 1926
Leiden, .
, ,
quarks,

,
.
,
,
.

Ovrut. 11
-7 3
1 .
,

, brane,
. 3-
( ) .
,
()
10-19
m. brane ,

.
, ,
:
. , branes.
branes

. Steinhardt ,
branes
.
11 ,
branes 5 .
, 6 .
branes
79
,
.
,
. -
branes- .
branes
. ,
,
branes .
,
brane.
branes ,
brane .
, brane
brane
.
Big Bang.

Ovrut.
, Steinhardt,
,
. ,
.
, 26
(http://xxx.lanl.gov/abs/hep-th/0108187),
Steinhardt, Nathan Seiberg Princeton,
.
,
brane
.
, branes
, , brane
. brane
. branes , ,
.
, Big
Bang. , branes
,
.
. ,

branes
. ,
.
,
.
80
, -
brane-

.

.
, branes
, brane
.
brane , Big
Bang. .
brane ,
.

David N. Spergel Princeton.

.
;
Steinhardt, Big
Bang .
20 ,
Steinhardt.

, Guth.
,

.
,
Guth.
-
.
,
Andrei Linde Stanford,

.
, Steinhardt
, branes.
, Linde branes

. ,
, . Steinhardt
.

,
Ovrut. branes
, ,
, .
81
, Ovrut,
,
. , ,
,
quarks
.
branes,
,

, Ovrut.

. ,
. Big
Bang
,
.
.

, Ovrut.

.

Ovrut.
.
Nima Arkani_Hamed SLAC

CERN
;

,
,
. ,
- .

extra - .
Fermi,
:
;
(GUT)

.
,
, Planck,
. Planck
-33
10 cm
82
,
.
,
.
:
(mm)!

30 . 1mm
-33
Planck 10 cm.

.
, ,
.
,
. Nima ArkaniHamed ( / U.C.Berkeley), (Stanford Linear
Accelerator Center (SLAC) Gia Dvali (NYU)
,
.
1mm

.
20
.

-33
10 cm, .
, 1mm.

.
.

, .

.

.

,
;
1.000.000 top quark;
;
,
;
,
.
,
.
.
,
. ,
Lisa Randal (MIT) Raman Sundrum (Stanford),
.
83

.
(LHC) CERN
,
LHC
.

LHC.
,
,
.
,

1mm.

,

1mm.

Big Bang
NEWGEN 2000.
H M

. O

B

M M. M X

...
B . H
M
. X
X. . T
, - -
CERN (E E Y
E)
K.
O B M M
90,
M ,
T. ,
Y (Superstring Theory).
M
,
K . T
, ,
. E M M,

. H ...
.
, , Y
84
. ,
, ()
,
!
,
- . O B
M M
, !
: O
...
-43
(10
...
0,000000000000
00000000000000000000000000000001 M M)
.
A

. K
K (,
, ) . T
20 ,

( )
( , , ).
.
M
M, B ,

.
,

!
M M .
, , :
,
! A
M A T ,
K, .
M , B
:
, 1
, (
-31
10
). A ,
.
,
93
( 10 -
,
). A
( )
.
T M M

.

, ,
- M
M,
... . H
,
B .
85
O
, I
M M
M
;
O
B

-,

. O

A
.
A

. A M
, M
(Big Crunch).

. A ,
. M M

(t= - ) (t=0)
M M, B. H
,

.
A
, .
M M :
,
, ,
. T
M ,
, B
- : E M M
,
. ,

.
O K,
M M M
. ...
:
M M

. ,
.
M M , ,

1.093 .
T
, . M
86

. T , ,
, . O
! K
, ,
, CERN.
B
, , . (A
). O B
A M ( Caltech,
K) T N (I E
M IHES, )
(asymptotic past triviality). O
,
.

. A
, B.

( ). T
(.. trivial
) .
K ( ...
) ...

. O ,
, .
.
O B

, -M
M . T
, B. ,
.
(, , )
. ,
,
. E

.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
-
;
;

Kaluza-Klein
87

-

:

.
.

1960, Gabrielle Veneziano
, .
1970 John Schwarz Joel
Scherk o
.
;
(
) .

.
, ,
, Big Bang .
.

(
), .
, spin
(, ).
.
,
spin=2.
,
spin=2.
.
.

, .
.
,
. , ,
,
.
88
() ,
().
.
,
. ,
, .
.
.,
.
;

.
,
10-13
cm.

.
-
-
. :

( )

. :

89

, 10-33 cm.
Plank.
,

.

.
, . , (,
, quark) ,
. ,
.

.
, Plank 10-33 cm,
. ,
,
,
.
(10-33 cm),
. ,
.
:

,
.
,
spin=2 .

90

.
. .

Feynman
,

Planck 10-33 cm.

:
.
,
(
) ( ).

,

91
.
.
;

Plank, ,
.
, :
;
,
.

( ,
).
.

.

Plank.

.
. (
)
,
.

. (compactification).
,
.
.

!
92

Chaos Theory

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Chaos Theory

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

tropical viruses

Search BBC News

Advanced search options

Medical workers at the 1995 former Zaire outbreak

Theories on the origins of the 30 or more new diseases to

BBC RADIO NEWS

BBC ONE TV NEWS

Ebola cure hope

Fighting back at ebola

Flu symptoms at first

Ebola-like virus under control

Ebola ruled out as man dies

By then, the virus will have

Quarantined children during

This is followed by nausea, vomiting and diarrhoea.

Other well-known haemorrhagic fevers are:

Lassa fever - first noticed in the 1960s after an

Garcini Kola, a west African

Some scientists say that the growing number of so-called

Sexually transmitted diseases

Search BBC News Online

Advanced search options

BBC RADIO NEWS

There has been a big increase in sexually transmitted

BBC ONE TV NEWS

It has an incubation period of only a few days.

Males experience a discharge from the urethra causing

Young should abstain from

Sex disease cases rise

Sex diseases on the increase

Sex disease checks - by post

However, the long term complications can be severe,

Sometimes the warts cause irritation and itching.

Universally of Marineland Alimentary Gastronomy Universe of Murray

SUPER G-STRING FIELD THEORY*

Uniformity of Modern Elementary Particle Physics Unintelligibility of

Nonabel was I ere I saw Lebanon --- Yang and Mills

derive models of GUTS\ref{5} cosmetology (gastronomy), through the use of string

2. NEW STRING FIELD* THEORY

****This footnote is much too small to read, so dont even bother.

Fig. 2. Map to the upper-half plane

\put(60,12){$\kcl$} \put(60,14){$\kcl$} \put(60,16){$\kcl$} \put(60,18){$\kcl$}

6. COVARIANTIZING THE LIGHT CONE

Werner Heisenberg: the Columbus of quantum mechanics

international post-First World War community of quantum and atomic theorists,

High-energy theory and elementary particles

president of the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, he invited hundreds of young

The String 2 test installation for CERNs Large Hadron Collider

Picture of the month

Bioastronomy 2002: Life Among the Stars

The above picture is of the Heart

January 18, 2002

In Search of E.T.s Breath

January 17, 2002

Astrobiology Profile: David WynnWilliams

January 16, 2002

Living on Fools Gold

Living on Fools Gold

energy is generated in the oxidation of ferrous to ferric iron, these bacteria

probably existed in the Archaean, says Amils. He cites recent molecular

We believe that chemolithotrophy is an ancient energy system, and we need

56k (3.7mb) | T1 (15mb)

Imagine hot chocolate with breakfast, sliding on

Dr. Wynn-Williams studies microscopic bacteria