Reed for math/physics?

[Anonymous]

Does Reed have a particle collider?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is Reed for astrophysics/particle physics?

Reed lacks the astronomical tradition of colleges with long-established observatories. Reed also does not offer a geosciences program, which would be important for the study of planetary science. Nonetheless, Reed would offer the necessary foundation in physics and mathematics for a student who is interested in modern-day astrophysics and cosmology.

Geoscience and Astro are separate fields and really have little collaboration.

Students interested in astrophysics and cosmology may be interested in planetary science as well. And the methods and insights of geosciences programs are highly relevant to planetary science.

Then join a research lab in the summer? The information you actually need is physics, not the planetary geochemistry, which is mostly steered by your research interest and maybe one grad course. Cosmological research mostly doesn't involve much planetary composition research, it involves foundational physics. Theoretical physics is the gateway to exploring these research fields. Much of cosmology deals with dark matter candidacy.

The question of dark energy tends to be more accessible to observational cosmologists. Inquiry into dark matter falls more within the realm of experimental and particle physics.

You don’t think particle physics has a connection to people who observe the early universe?

Some researchers entire career is the belief that understanding fundamental particles makes most sense through cosmological inquiry over other methods.

The early universe, at least with respect to electromagnetic information, is practically and theoretically inaccessible to observational cosmologists. Inquiry into this stage, then, relies predominately on theoretical models and particle collider experimentation.

And what do you think they’re modeling? Do you know what a particle is? Why we have different ones? These models rely on our understanding of how fundamental particles are formed and interact. It seems you don’t actually know what the value of the cosmic expansion is…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does Reed have a particle collider?

Reed is an undergraduate liberal arts college

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is Reed for astrophysics/particle physics?

Reed lacks the astronomical tradition of colleges with long-established observatories. Reed also does not offer a geosciences program, which would be important for the study of planetary science. Nonetheless, Reed would offer the necessary foundation in physics and mathematics for a student who is interested in modern-day astrophysics and cosmology.

Geoscience and Astro are separate fields and really have little collaboration.

Students interested in astrophysics and cosmology may be interested in planetary science as well. And the methods and insights of geosciences programs are highly relevant to planetary science.

Then join a research lab in the summer? The information you actually need is physics, not the planetary geochemistry, which is mostly steered by your research interest and maybe one grad course. Cosmological research mostly doesn't involve much planetary composition research, it involves foundational physics. Theoretical physics is the gateway to exploring these research fields. Much of cosmology deals with dark matter candidacy.

The question of dark energy tends to be more accessible to observational cosmologists. Inquiry into dark matter falls more within the realm of experimental and particle physics.

You don’t think particle physics has a connection to people who observe the early universe?

Some researchers entire career is the belief that understanding fundamental particles makes most sense through cosmological inquiry over other methods.

The early universe, at least with respect to electromagnetic information, is practically and theoretically inaccessible to observational cosmologists. Inquiry into this stage, then, relies predominately on theoretical models and particle collider experimentation.

And what do you think they’re modeling? Do you know what a particle is? Why we have different ones? These models rely on our understanding of how fundamental particles are formed and interact. It seems you don’t actually know what the value of the cosmic expansion is…

If I were to infer based on context, it appears you are confusing cosmic expansion with cosmic inflation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Does Reed have a particle collider?

Colleges and universities generally rely on collaborative installations for access to this technology. As an illustration as to why this represents the case, the footprint of the Large Hadron Collider exceeds the area of the entirety of Reed College by over 100 fold.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does Reed have a particle collider?

Colleges and universities generally rely on collaborative installations for access to this technology. As an illustration as to why this represents the case, the footprint of the Large Hadron Collider exceeds the area of the entirety of Reed College by over 100 fold.

AI

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is Reed for astrophysics/particle physics?

Reed lacks the astronomical tradition of colleges with long-established observatories. Reed also does not offer a geosciences program, which would be important for the study of planetary science. Nonetheless, Reed would offer the necessary foundation in physics and mathematics for a student who is interested in modern-day astrophysics and cosmology.

Geoscience and Astro are separate fields and really have little collaboration.

Students interested in astrophysics and cosmology may be interested in planetary science as well. And the methods and insights of geosciences programs are highly relevant to planetary science.

Then join a research lab in the summer? The information you actually need is physics, not the planetary geochemistry, which is mostly steered by your research interest and maybe one grad course. Cosmological research mostly doesn't involve much planetary composition research, it involves foundational physics. Theoretical physics is the gateway to exploring these research fields. Much of cosmology deals with dark matter candidacy.

The question of dark energy tends to be more accessible to observational cosmologists. Inquiry into dark matter falls more within the realm of experimental and particle physics.

You don’t think particle physics has a connection to people who observe the early universe?

Some researchers entire career is the belief that understanding fundamental particles makes most sense through cosmological inquiry over other methods.

The early universe, at least with respect to electromagnetic information, is practically and theoretically inaccessible to observational cosmologists. Inquiry into this stage, then, relies predominately on theoretical models and particle collider experimentation.

And what do you think they’re modeling? Do you know what a particle is? Why we have different ones? These models rely on our understanding of how fundamental particles are formed and interact. It seems you don’t actually know what the value of the cosmic expansion is…

If I were to infer based on context, it appears you are confusing cosmic expansion with cosmic inflation.

I find it difficult to talk to someone about physics when they don’t comprehend how cosmological models both informs and tests our understanding of particle physics. It’s seriously one of the largest sub fields of cosmology that you can’t have gotten a degree in physics.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is Reed for astrophysics/particle physics?

Reed lacks the astronomical tradition of colleges with long-established observatories. Reed also does not offer a geosciences program, which would be important for the study of planetary science. Nonetheless, Reed would offer the necessary foundation in physics and mathematics for a student who is interested in modern-day astrophysics and cosmology.

Geoscience and Astro are separate fields and really have little collaboration.

Students interested in astrophysics and cosmology may be interested in planetary science as well. And the methods and insights of geosciences programs are highly relevant to planetary science.

Then join a research lab in the summer? The information you actually need is physics, not the planetary geochemistry, which is mostly steered by your research interest and maybe one grad course. Cosmological research mostly doesn't involve much planetary composition research, it involves foundational physics. Theoretical physics is the gateway to exploring these research fields. Much of cosmology deals with dark matter candidacy.

The question of dark energy tends to be more accessible to observational cosmologists. Inquiry into dark matter falls more within the realm of experimental and particle physics.

You don’t think particle physics has a connection to people who observe the early universe?

Some researchers entire career is the belief that understanding fundamental particles makes most sense through cosmological inquiry over other methods.

The early universe, at least with respect to electromagnetic information, is practically and theoretically inaccessible to observational cosmologists. Inquiry into this stage, then, relies predominately on theoretical models and particle collider experimentation.

And cosmology? I can’t believed someone is arguing that cosmology has no relation to particle physics. Dark Matter, something cosmologists are very interested in, is everywhere- and it’s an unidentified subatomic particle. If I were to ask you to identify a subatomic particle, maybe if you’re a whizz, you’d think up a particle collider, but the naive question would be “hey, where do these particles come from and how do they form,” hence Cosmology…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does Reed have a particle collider?

Colleges and universities generally rely on collaborative installations for access to this technology. As an illustration as to why this represents the case, the footprint of the Large Hadron Collider exceeds the area of the entirety of Reed College by over 100 fold.

AI

Nope — original writing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is Reed for astrophysics/particle physics?

Reed lacks the astronomical tradition of colleges with long-established observatories. Reed also does not offer a geosciences program, which would be important for the study of planetary science. Nonetheless, Reed would offer the necessary foundation in physics and mathematics for a student who is interested in modern-day astrophysics and cosmology.

Geoscience and Astro are separate fields and really have little collaboration.

Students interested in astrophysics and cosmology may be interested in planetary science as well. And the methods and insights of geosciences programs are highly relevant to planetary science.

Then join a research lab in the summer? The information you actually need is physics, not the planetary geochemistry, which is mostly steered by your research interest and maybe one grad course. Cosmological research mostly doesn't involve much planetary composition research, it involves foundational physics. Theoretical physics is the gateway to exploring these research fields. Much of cosmology deals with dark matter candidacy.

The question of dark energy tends to be more accessible to observational cosmologists. Inquiry into dark matter falls more within the realm of experimental and particle physics.

You don’t think particle physics has a connection to people who observe the early universe?

Some researchers entire career is the belief that understanding fundamental particles makes most sense through cosmological inquiry over other methods.

The early universe, at least with respect to electromagnetic information, is practically and theoretically inaccessible to observational cosmologists. Inquiry into this stage, then, relies predominately on theoretical models and particle collider experimentation.

And cosmology? I can’t believed someone is arguing that cosmology has no relation to particle physics. Dark Matter, something cosmologists are very interested in, is everywhere- and it’s an unidentified subatomic particle. If I were to ask you to identify a subatomic particle, maybe if you’re a whizz, you’d think up a particle collider, but the naive question would be “hey, where do these particles come from and how do they form,” hence Cosmology…

You have stated a hypothesis as fact. The concept of Dark Matter has been inferred through careful measurements of known matter and through mathematics. However, the nature of Dark Matter's physical manifestation remains a mystery.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does Reed have a particle collider?

Colleges and universities generally rely on collaborative installations for access to this technology. As an illustration as to why this represents the case, the footprint of the Large Hadron Collider exceeds the area of the entirety of Reed College by over 100 fold.

AI

Most of these responses are AI.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is Reed for astrophysics/particle physics?

Reed lacks the astronomical tradition of colleges with long-established observatories. Reed also does not offer a geosciences program, which would be important for the study of planetary science. Nonetheless, Reed would offer the necessary foundation in physics and mathematics for a student who is interested in modern-day astrophysics and cosmology.

Geoscience and Astro are separate fields and really have little collaboration.

Students interested in astrophysics and cosmology may be interested in planetary science as well. And the methods and insights of geosciences programs are highly relevant to planetary science.

Then join a research lab in the summer? The information you actually need is physics, not the planetary geochemistry, which is mostly steered by your research interest and maybe one grad course. Cosmological research mostly doesn't involve much planetary composition research, it involves foundational physics. Theoretical physics is the gateway to exploring these research fields. Much of cosmology deals with dark matter candidacy.

The question of dark energy tends to be more accessible to observational cosmologists. Inquiry into dark matter falls more within the realm of experimental and particle physics.

You don’t think particle physics has a connection to people who observe the early universe?

Some researchers entire career is the belief that understanding fundamental particles makes most sense through cosmological inquiry over other methods.

The early universe, at least with respect to electromagnetic information, is practically and theoretically inaccessible to observational cosmologists. Inquiry into this stage, then, relies predominately on theoretical models and particle collider experimentation.

And cosmology? I can’t believed someone is arguing that cosmology has no relation to particle physics. Dark Matter, something cosmologists are very interested in, is everywhere- and it’s an unidentified subatomic particle. If I were to ask you to identify a subatomic particle, maybe if you’re a whizz, you’d think up a particle collider, but the naive question would be “hey, where do these particles come from and how do they form,” hence Cosmology…

In changing "observational cosmology" to "cosmology," you have lost the distinction of prior comments.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is Reed for astrophysics/particle physics?

Reed lacks the astronomical tradition of colleges with long-established observatories. Reed also does not offer a geosciences program, which would be important for the study of planetary science. Nonetheless, Reed would offer the necessary foundation in physics and mathematics for a student who is interested in modern-day astrophysics and cosmology.

Geoscience and Astro are separate fields and really have little collaboration.

Students interested in astrophysics and cosmology may be interested in planetary science as well. And the methods and insights of geosciences programs are highly relevant to planetary science.

Then join a research lab in the summer? The information you actually need is physics, not the planetary geochemistry, which is mostly steered by your research interest and maybe one grad course. Cosmological research mostly doesn't involve much planetary composition research, it involves foundational physics. Theoretical physics is the gateway to exploring these research fields. Much of cosmology deals with dark matter candidacy.

The question of dark energy tends to be more accessible to observational cosmologists. Inquiry into dark matter falls more within the realm of experimental and particle physics.

You don’t think particle physics has a connection to people who observe the early universe?

Some researchers entire career is the belief that understanding fundamental particles makes most sense through cosmological inquiry over other methods.

The early universe, at least with respect to electromagnetic information, is practically and theoretically inaccessible to observational cosmologists. Inquiry into this stage, then, relies predominately on theoretical models and particle collider experimentation.

And cosmology? I can’t believed someone is arguing that cosmology has no relation to particle physics. Dark Matter, something cosmologists are very interested in, is everywhere- and it’s an unidentified subatomic particle. If I were to ask you to identify a subatomic particle, maybe if you’re a whizz, you’d think up a particle collider, but the naive question would be “hey, where do these particles come from and how do they form,” hence Cosmology…

You have stated a hypothesis as fact. The concept of Dark Matter has been inferred through careful measurements of known matter and through mathematics. However, the nature of Dark Matter's physical manifestation remains a mystery.

Well yes, a very accepted hypothesis that a broad majority of physicists would agree with. Was that substanceless nuance what you needed?

Why are you even using the colloquial form of hypothesis anyway?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is Reed for astrophysics/particle physics?

Reed lacks the astronomical tradition of colleges with long-established observatories. Reed also does not offer a geosciences program, which would be important for the study of planetary science. Nonetheless, Reed would offer the necessary foundation in physics and mathematics for a student who is interested in modern-day astrophysics and cosmology.

Geoscience and Astro are separate fields and really have little collaboration.

Students interested in astrophysics and cosmology may be interested in planetary science as well. And the methods and insights of geosciences programs are highly relevant to planetary science.

Then join a research lab in the summer? The information you actually need is physics, not the planetary geochemistry, which is mostly steered by your research interest and maybe one grad course. Cosmological research mostly doesn't involve much planetary composition research, it involves foundational physics. Theoretical physics is the gateway to exploring these research fields. Much of cosmology deals with dark matter candidacy.

The question of dark energy tends to be more accessible to observational cosmologists. Inquiry into dark matter falls more within the realm of experimental and particle physics.

You don’t think particle physics has a connection to people who observe the early universe?

Some researchers entire career is the belief that understanding fundamental particles makes most sense through cosmological inquiry over other methods.

The early universe, at least with respect to electromagnetic information, is practically and theoretically inaccessible to observational cosmologists. Inquiry into this stage, then, relies predominately on theoretical models and particle collider experimentation.

And cosmology? I can’t believed someone is arguing that cosmology has no relation to particle physics. Dark Matter, something cosmologists are very interested in, is everywhere- and it’s an unidentified subatomic particle. If I were to ask you to identify a subatomic particle, maybe if you’re a whizz, you’d think up a particle collider, but the naive question would be “hey, where do these particles come from and how do they form,” hence Cosmology…

In changing "observational cosmology" to "cosmology," you have lost the distinction of prior comments.

So you had no argument to begin with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How is Reed for astrophysics/particle physics?

Reed lacks the astronomical tradition of colleges with long-established observatories. Reed also does not offer a geosciences program, which would be important for the study of planetary science. Nonetheless, Reed would offer the necessary foundation in physics and mathematics for a student who is interested in modern-day astrophysics and cosmology.

Geoscience and Astro are separate fields and really have little collaboration.

Students interested in astrophysics and cosmology may be interested in planetary science as well. And the methods and insights of geosciences programs are highly relevant to planetary science.

Then join a research lab in the summer? The information you actually need is physics, not the planetary geochemistry, which is mostly steered by your research interest and maybe one grad course. Cosmological research mostly doesn't involve much planetary composition research, it involves foundational physics. Theoretical physics is the gateway to exploring these research fields. Much of cosmology deals with dark matter candidacy.

The question of dark energy tends to be more accessible to observational cosmologists. Inquiry into dark matter falls more within the realm of experimental and particle physics.

You don’t think particle physics has a connection to people who observe the early universe?

Some researchers entire career is the belief that understanding fundamental particles makes most sense through cosmological inquiry over other methods.

The early universe, at least with respect to electromagnetic information, is practically and theoretically inaccessible to observational cosmologists. Inquiry into this stage, then, relies predominately on theoretical models and particle collider experimentation.

And cosmology? I can’t believed someone is arguing that cosmology has no relation to particle physics. Dark Matter, something cosmologists are very interested in, is everywhere- and it’s an unidentified subatomic particle. If I were to ask you to identify a subatomic particle, maybe if you’re a whizz, you’d think up a particle collider, but the naive question would be “hey, where do these particles come from and how do they form,” hence Cosmology…

In changing "observational cosmology" to "cosmology," you have lost the distinction of prior comments.

How do you think cosmologists verify their theory?