physics

Old college threads.
Locked
User avatar
grapesmoker
Sin
Posts: 6365
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 5:23 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

physics

Post by grapesmoker » Mon Feb 28, 2011 5:28 pm

I edited/wrote all the physics for this tournament, so I guess if you want to talk about that this is the place to do it.
Jerry Vinokurov
ex-LJHS, ex-Berkeley, ex-Brown, sorta-ex-CMU
code ape, loud voice, general nuissance

User avatar
MicroEStudent
Rikku
Posts: 462
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 11:20 pm

Re: physics

Post by MicroEStudent » Mon Feb 28, 2011 8:02 pm

I enjoyed the physics in this tournament and thought that it was well written.

One minor note regarding the Hall effect question in the Georgetown/ASU packet: is there another word to use for "effect"? Hearing "effect" and then "solid state" I believe makes the answer fairly obvious. I don't have a good suggestion for a substitution for "effect", so there may not be one.
Nathaniel Kane
RIT '09, '11 (BS Microelectronic Engineering, MS Microelectronic Engineering)

User avatar
grapesmoker
Sin
Posts: 6365
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 5:23 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: physics

Post by grapesmoker » Mon Feb 28, 2011 8:07 pm

MicroEStudent wrote:I enjoyed the physics in this tournament and thought that it was well written.

One minor note regarding the Hall effect question in the Georgetown/ASU packet: is there another word to use for "effect"? Hearing "effect" and then "solid state" I believe makes the answer fairly obvious. I don't have a good suggestion for a substitution for "effect", so there may not be one.
Sometimes if I'm trying to be more vague I use the word "phenomenon." I wonder if this might not just be a case of you having really good knowledge, since for me personally those associations don't evaluate to "Hall effect" in any meaningful way.
Jerry Vinokurov
ex-LJHS, ex-Berkeley, ex-Brown, sorta-ex-CMU
code ape, loud voice, general nuissance

User avatar
MicroEStudent
Rikku
Posts: 462
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2009 11:20 pm

Re: physics

Post by MicroEStudent » Mon Feb 28, 2011 8:28 pm

grapesmoker wrote:
MicroEStudent wrote:I enjoyed the physics in this tournament and thought that it was well written.

One minor note regarding the Hall effect question in the Georgetown/ASU packet: is there another word to use for "effect"? Hearing "effect" and then "solid state" I believe makes the answer fairly obvious. I don't have a good suggestion for a substitution for "effect", so there may not be one.
Sometimes if I'm trying to be more vague I use the word "phenomenon." I wonder if this might not just be a case of you having really good knowledge, since for me personally those associations don't evaluate to "Hall effect" in any meaningful way.
I won't disagree that it may be due to knowledge. It's just that when those two terms are mentioned in a non-Nationals level tournament, the answer is almost always the Hall effect.
Nathaniel Kane
RIT '09, '11 (BS Microelectronic Engineering, MS Microelectronic Engineering)

User avatar
grapesmoker
Sin
Posts: 6365
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 5:23 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: physics

Post by grapesmoker » Mon Feb 28, 2011 9:01 pm

MicroEStudent wrote:I won't disagree that it may be due to knowledge. It's just that when those two terms are mentioned in a non-Nationals level tournament, the answer is almost always the Hall effect.
It hadn't occurred to me, but I will note the conjunction for future reference.
Jerry Vinokurov
ex-LJHS, ex-Berkeley, ex-Brown, sorta-ex-CMU
code ape, loud voice, general nuissance

Adventure Temple Trail
Auron
Posts: 2617
Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2008 9:52 pm

Re: physics

Post by Adventure Temple Trail » Tue Mar 01, 2011 3:44 am

I'm curious what sort of alternate answers were acceptable for "metastable". I negged with "excited state" on the population inversion clue, which seemed to be saying that more electrons are metastable than stable during population inversion. I have no background besides my quizbowl knowledge about this, and have heard population inversion described every time as more electrons being in excited state than ground state. So who was wrong here - me buzzing in at that point, every other question I've heard about population inversion, or this question? (i guess its me until you teach me all i need to know about physics, mister Jerry!) The text of the tossup might help.
Matt J.
ex-Georgetown Day HS, ex-Yale
member emeritus, ACF

Try my original crossword puzzles

User avatar
Quantum Mushroom Billiard Hat
Rikku
Posts: 435
Joined: Tue Jun 12, 2007 1:16 pm
Location: Midland, MI

Re: physics

Post by Quantum Mushroom Billiard Hat » Tue Mar 01, 2011 9:37 am

RyuAqua wrote:I'm curious what sort of alternate answers were acceptable for "metastable". I negged with "excited state" on the population inversion clue, which seemed to be saying that more electrons are metastable than stable during population inversion. I have no background besides my quizbowl knowledge about this, and have heard population inversion described every time as more electrons being in excited state than ground state. So who was wrong here - me buzzing in at that point, every other question I've heard about population inversion, or this question? (i guess its me until you teach me all i need to know about physics, mister Jerry!) The text of the tossup might help.
There weren't any listed, which is a problem. I did the same thing with "superheated fluid" off the bubble chamber clue, right before the question said that the bubble chamber is a superheated liquid.
19. The quantum Zeno effect occurs when a quantum system in this type of state is measured frequently, causing it to remain in that state. This type of state is the operating basis for the bubble chamber, since the superheated liquid hydrogen used in those devices represents one realization of this kind of state. Techniques such as optical pumping
are used to create population inversions in which electrons are placed into these types of states, from which they undergo a lasing cascade. This term characterizes the output of an element such as a flip-flop before it has settled following a transition, and a mechanical example of this type of state is a ball sitting on top of a hill which will roll down the hill if disturbed. For ten points, identify this type of state in which a system is in equilibrium but may easily transition to a lower energy state under any perturbation.
ANSWER: meta-stable [accept word forms]
Michael Hausinger
Coach, Bay City Western High School
formerly of University of Michigan and East Lansing High School

User avatar
Mechanical Beasts
Banned Cheater
Posts: 5673
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 10:50 pm

Re: physics

Post by Mechanical Beasts » Tue Mar 01, 2011 10:47 am

RyuAqua wrote:I'm curious what sort of alternate answers were acceptable for "metastable". I negged with "excited state" on the population inversion clue, which seemed to be saying that more electrons are metastable than stable during population inversion. I have no background besides my quizbowl knowledge about this, and have heard population inversion described every time as more electrons being in excited state than ground state. So who was wrong here - me buzzing in at that point, every other question I've heard about population inversion, or this question? (i guess its me until you teach me all i need to know about physics, mister Jerry!) The text of the tossup might help.
The electrons are individually excited; the system of electrons collectively is metastable. Is that a fair description, Jerry? It's surely a hard thing to specify uniquely with words, so I can more than understand a buzz with "excited" off that clue if you didn't know the earlier clues.
Andrew Watkins

User avatar
grapesmoker
Sin
Posts: 6365
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 5:23 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: physics

Post by grapesmoker » Tue Mar 01, 2011 11:27 am

RyuAqua wrote:I'm curious what sort of alternate answers were acceptable for "metastable". I negged with "excited state" on the population inversion clue, which seemed to be saying that more electrons are metastable than stable during population inversion. I have no background besides my quizbowl knowledge about this, and have heard population inversion described every time as more electrons being in excited state than ground state. So who was wrong here - me buzzing in at that point, every other question I've heard about population inversion, or this question? (i guess its me until you teach me all i need to know about physics, mister Jerry!) The text of the tossup might help.
Well, the problem with your buzz is that "excited state" is ruled out by previous clues; however, to be generous, I should have probably made that promptable or just mentioned "excited state with this property," in the question.
There weren't any listed, which is a problem. I did the same thing with "superheated fluid" off the bubble chamber clue, right before the question said that the bubble chamber is a superheated liquid.
Sorry about that. I didn't want to drop superheated helium right off the bat in that second clue. I was hoping that the quantum Zeno effect clue would keep people from buzzing with those sorts of answers, but again, I should have made the specific answer promptable.
Jerry Vinokurov
ex-LJHS, ex-Berkeley, ex-Brown, sorta-ex-CMU
code ape, loud voice, general nuissance

User avatar
grapesmoker
Sin
Posts: 6365
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 5:23 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: physics

Post by grapesmoker » Tue Mar 01, 2011 11:33 am

Crazy Andy Watkins wrote:The electrons are individually excited; the system of electrons collectively is metastable. Is that a fair description, Jerry? It's surely a hard thing to specify uniquely with words, so I can more than understand a buzz with "excited" off that clue if you didn't know the earlier clues.
Eh, I think you can quite easily describe the system as being in an excited state. The concept metastability refers specifically to the fact that a perturbation can knock the state out of local equilibrium. I suppose there might exist excited and stable systems, though it would take someone who gets deeper into atomic physics than me to say whether that's true; my intuition is that in the context of atomic systems at least, every metastable state is also an excited state of the system. However, the converse is not true in general, as seen from the example of supercritical fluids. They are not "excited" in the conventional sense, but they're definitely metastable.

Like I said, I should have made "excited," and "superheated" promptable, and perhaps "unstable" should be accepted as well.
Jerry Vinokurov
ex-LJHS, ex-Berkeley, ex-Brown, sorta-ex-CMU
code ape, loud voice, general nuissance

User avatar
theMoMA
Forums Staff: Administrator
Posts: 5692
Joined: Mon Oct 23, 2006 2:00 am

Re: physics

Post by theMoMA » Tue Mar 01, 2011 2:55 pm

The tossup on black bodies was somewhat conspicuous compared to the rest of the physics. It seemed to cut right to the chase with fairly easy clues after the leadin; I don't know if this is a case where a less-than-fully-edited tossup made it into the set accidentally, but that's what it felt like to play. I also thought that the clue about population inversion was slightly misleading. I don't think there's anything wrong with describing it, as you said, as an "excited state with this property" or something like that. I feel like even if you prompted on "excited," you'd probably just turn those negs into prompt-negs. Also, I would have accepted "unstable," at least on the Quantum Zeno clue. Good idea for a tossup though.

I enjoyed most of the physics in the tournament. The bonuses were the type that seemed to reward primary knowledge, sometimes to the extent that they got pretty difficult for teams without a scientist. Looking back, it seemed like there might have been more "modern" particle physics (by that I mean not basic stuff like photons, electrons, etc.) than at the typical tournament (I'm remembering at least three bonuses and the tossup on the strange quark). But that's the sort of drift that happens in a packet-submission tournament and it wasn't detrimental or anything.
Andrew Hart
Minnesota alum

User avatar
grapesmoker
Sin
Posts: 6365
Joined: Sat Oct 25, 2003 5:23 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: physics

Post by grapesmoker » Tue Mar 01, 2011 3:25 pm

theMoMA wrote:The tossup on black bodies was somewhat conspicuous compared to the rest of the physics. It seemed to cut right to the chase with fairly easy clues after the leadin; I don't know if this is a case where a less-than-fully-edited tossup made it into the set accidentally, but that's what it felt like to play.
How'd that happen? There should not have been a tossup on "black bodies." This is almost certainly a compilation mistake, as I distinctly remember editing out that question. What packet was it in?
I enjoyed most of the physics in the tournament. The bonuses were the type that seemed to reward primary knowledge, sometimes to the extent that they got pretty difficult for teams without a scientist. Looking back, it seemed like there might have been more "modern" particle physics (by that I mean not basic stuff like photons, electrons, etc.) than at the typical tournament (I'm remembering at least three bonuses and the tossup on the strange quark). But that's the sort of drift that happens in a packet-submission tournament and it wasn't detrimental or anything.
That was more reflective of what got submitted. I noticed a bit more particle physics in this set overall, and when I thought it was appropriate I tried to stay with the general theme that the submitted questions had.
Jerry Vinokurov
ex-LJHS, ex-Berkeley, ex-Brown, sorta-ex-CMU
code ape, loud voice, general nuissance

User avatar
Mechanical Beasts
Banned Cheater
Posts: 5673
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 10:50 pm

Re: physics

Post by Mechanical Beasts » Tue Mar 01, 2011 3:30 pm

grapesmoker wrote:
theMoMA wrote:The tossup on black bodies was somewhat conspicuous compared to the rest of the physics. It seemed to cut right to the chase with fairly easy clues after the leadin; I don't know if this is a case where a less-than-fully-edited tossup made it into the set accidentally, but that's what it felt like to play.
How'd that happen? There should not have been a tossup on "black bodies." This is almost certainly a compilation mistake, as I distinctly remember editing out that question. What packet was it in?
I think I forced it into astro in the two am-seven am crunch. I was aware of the issues with it but I was too bleary to fix them up satisfactorily or replace it, so I tried to make it not totally unreasonable and content myself with that.
Andrew Watkins

Locked