Jump to content

random_soldier1337

Senior Members
  • Content Count

    139
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

3 Neutral

About random_soldier1337

  • Rank
    Baryon

Profile Information

  • Favorite Area of Science
    Physics

Recent Profile Visitors

4185 profile views
  1. I was referring to experiments with materials for high radiation environments often seen in materials science and nuclear engineering research.
  2. Wait, I'm not sure I follow. Do you mean to say bubble and spark chambers came about as a result of understanding the physics behind particle detection and then varying one aspect or another to improve upon detection chambers?
  3. My earlier post probably didn't get across what I was trying to say. What I am basically asking is, are most specialized areas of science at the research level focused on one very specific detail? Is that why the focus is on the same task with minor modifications so that you can figure out how the object reacts/phenomena occurs in all possible situations? And given that there are so many variables we know of nowadays is this why you can find a lot more literature, more than a textbooks worth, on one very particular object/phenomena?
  4. I don't really see where you are trying to go with all this. What's you point?
  5. Something I've seen in nuclear materials research is that all of them are basically, I have a material, I am going to shoot energetic particles at it, I am going to record the numbers, take some before and after pictures and talk about what I saw. It does make sense that you would research like this considering most materials in nuclear environments do suffer bombardment from energetic nuclei and subatomic particles. The consistency in the formula of this research process, however, is something I did not expect. Is this how it works for every field when you get into something very specific and become an expert on it like in a PhD? For example, would experimental study of ionization in plasmas in space have you always looking at spectroscopic data from one cosmic body or another and accounting for what there is from your spectroscopic data and what all forces may have acted in that region and to what extent to give you what you have got? Now that I put all my thoughts down, the answer seems like yes mostly. So I guess I'm probably looking for confirmation, unless there is something I didn't take note of.
  6. I really like the book for how much it covers. There's not a single topic that's missed that is relevant to nuclear reactor design/analysis. Often other books can miss a topic or two. It's just that the style is not to the point and often time is wasted talking about things that are irrelevant or won't be explained, at least until way later.
  7. Lol, I dunno. I just take people's word for these things. For all I know everything is an anime behind the scenes with cyborg ninjas and psychic super soldiers running around performing black ops, having death battles and philosophizing in the quiet moments, especially their death throes. Or maybe it's like a schoolyard with someone being nice and then someone being a jerk, "Hey you can't do that!" "Why not?" "Because you can't." "Sure I can." and that's all that happens. Anyway the project was supported by the IAEA.
  8. What would be a more appropriate classification of the software? Also I find it hard to believe someone could publish a paper in a well known journal with an illegitimate copy of MCNP without someone knocking on their door. Could be. I know you can get online access to the servers at the National labs from your own IP address to use it. Just not sure if even that is allowed to Iran so maybe what you are saying is actually the correct situation.
  9. I was reading papers on neutron flux traps. Some people in the University of Tehran used MCNP to determine effectiveness of different neutron moderators. Context out of the way, my question is regarding the situation. How did researchers paid by an organization like the University of Tehran get access to a software like MCNP?
  10. I don't follow. I did say photons have zero rest mass.
  11. Or at least honing ones current scientific skill/knowledge? How would one go about this? NOTE: I am talking about non-pandemic or otherwise non-emergency situation.
  12. As far as my knowledge goes, photons have a zero rest mass. They can have an effective mass based on their frequency/wavelength/energy/momentum.
  13. Or maybe, said person was trying to give you the benefit of the doubt but felt that all you wanted was any excuse for a fight and all the downvoted comments seemed to be hurtful jabs veiled as attempts at civil communication.
  14. Well then I did address the comment you were talking about. I have no idea what you are going on about otherwise. No U. You're the one who devolved into ad hominem and downvoting.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.