Can You Have a Barn Without Uranium?

I was perusing a back issue of Physics Today, reading an article about events at the Large Hadron Collider, when I noticed the word, “femtobarn”. It was defined as 10-39 sq.cm. or a decimal followed by 38 zeros then a one. This is pretty small.

As a midwesterner, I thought I knew the size of a barn. So I multiplied out the femto (you know, milli-, micro-, nano-, pico-, femto-) to get the quadrillion times larger 10-24sq.cm. This is a barn? I had to Google this, and found a clear article at Stanford defining it for lay-folk.

In brief, physicists in the 1940’s were often discussing the cross-sectional area of the Uranium Nucleus. They thought of calling it the Oppenheimer (too many syllables) or the Bethe (too likely to be heard as Beta). Well, most of the research was being done in the midwest, and slamming protons into this target made them think of tossing tomatoes at a barn. The name “barn” was used in a reviewed article, accepted, and it stuck. Now, why femtobarns as the standard unit? It’s just practical for their purposes, like kilometers or megabytes.

By now, if you’ve read this far, you are probably wondering, “why should we care?” Sure, it’s fun to say “femtobarn”, but what use is it in everyday life?

Share
Share

Continue ReadingCan You Have a Barn Without Uranium?

You May Have It Cockeyed If…

Science cannot disprove the existence of god. I have heard this claim made so often and by such a broad spectrum of people that I rarely really think about it. But is that the end of it? Science is concerned with materialism ( in a philosophic sense) and does best…

Continue ReadingYou May Have It Cockeyed If…

Humorous proofs for the existence of God

I know that many of you are philosophically running on empty.  You've already dabbled with all of the traditional so-called proofs for the existence of God.  You crave more proofs and it's got you down.  Well, cheer up!  I have the site for you! Exchristian.net has 300 (did someone say 300?) "Over…

Continue ReadingHumorous proofs for the existence of God

Yet another flaw in the creationist argument

This excellent website describes yet another flaw in the creationist argument.  Creationists like to argue that evolution could not have created the enormous complexity we see today, because the odds are miniscule that all we see today could have happened by chance.  That's true.  However, it misstates the problem, because…

Continue ReadingYet another flaw in the creationist argument

Who leaves better clues, God or the Devil?

Here's a Question I Like To Ask when arguing biblical accuracy versus scientific discovery: Postulating an omnipotent God and his potent yet subordinate nemesis: Which has the power to influence the minds of a few men to compose a persuasive text and create a regional following, and which to deposit…

Continue ReadingWho leaves better clues, God or the Devil?