We unify the models by a principle of maximum displacement for normal deformation, and of minimum stress for shear failure, reducing the controversy over the mechanism of internal friction in ice to the choice of values of four parameters in a single model. The four parameters represent, for a typical asperity contact, the sliding distance required to expel melt-water, the sliding distance required to break contact, the normal strain in the asperity, and the thickness of any ductile shear zone.
Mostly, the sliding took a stick-slip form: sliding velocity and shear stress, at a given position on the fault, were episodically time-dependent, shear stress dropping as sliding accelerated.
When we seek a local, instantaneous friction law, this militates in favour of proposed laws, in which the shear stress decreases with increasing speed, and against those, in which the shear-stress is velocity-independent or grows with increasing speed. We can test friction laws further by plotting the measurements, in combinations of variables, for which each proposed law predicts a simple graphical form.
The velocity and shear stress are non-uniform in space as well as in time. Measurements of the same stick-slip cycle, at several positions along the fault, allow us to identify a nucleation zone, which begins to slip before the rest of the fault, and to relate this spatial variation of velocity and the temporal variation of shear stress; the slipping region, therefore, behaves like a wave-packet, propagating away from the nucleation zone.
![]() |
(1) |
![]() |
(2) |
Measurements are presented of spin-correlated electron arrival rates
at a Mott-polarimeter's two detectors, from the reflected electron beam
from
, as a function of cobalt thickness, incident energy,
and incident intensity. Example results are displayed graphically in
chapter 5. They are analysed using three distinct
methodologies.
These measurements were preceded by a process (sections 5.4, 5.5) of trial and error, in which attempted measurements of the spin polarization of reflected electron beams revealed sources of systematic error, which were addressed by adaptations to the polarimeter, and to the experimental technique.
A protein topology web site has been created, containing information about protein structural topology, as well as an atlas of topology cartoons. In the atlas, every poly-peptide chain of more than 30 residues in the 1st July 1997 release of the Brookhaven Protein Data Bank is represented, by the cartoon of a chain to which it has at least 95% sequence similarity, which is believed to imply identical topology in almost all cases. Extensive modifications were made to the TOPS program, which, as visual comparison with the three-dimensional structures revealed, increased the proportion of the cartoons which represented the structures well enough to require no manual redrawing, to 82%.
The web site includes a server, which generates topology cartoons for user-submitted protein structures. It is intended to maintain the atlas and server, in conjunction with the macromolecular structure database and the mirror of the Brookhaven Protein Data Bank, at the European Bioinformatics Institute.
A magnetic field leads to a Zeeman term in an electron's
Hamiltonian, which depends on the angle
between the electron's spin vector and the magnetic
flux. As a result, when an electron wave is incident on the surface
of a bulk magnetic material (figure 1,) the
wave-number of the transmitted wave depends on
. When the conditions of continuity of the
wave-function, and of its first spatial derivative, at the surface,
and conservation of particles, are applied, an electron reflection
coefficient is obtained which also depends on
. Therefore, some polarizations are preferentially
reflected, while others are preferentially transmitted. The amplitude
reflection and transmission coefficients can readily be converted to
intensity coefficients, and averaged over an incoherent superposition
of electron waves of different
, e.g. an unpolarized incident beam. The reflected
polarization is
| (1) |
| (2) |
The analysis can be extended to multi-layers using the theory of Fabry-Perot etalons.
The multi-layer structure
forms (B.-Ch. Choi, P. J. Bode, and
J. A. C. Bland. Formation
of a two-dimensional
ferromagnetic surface alloy on
. Phys. Rev. B, 1998; B.-Ch. Choi,
P. J. Bode, and J. A. C. Bland. Magnetic
anisotropy strength and surface alloy formation in
overlayers. Phys. Rev. B, 1999;
Structure
and magnetic properties of a two-dimensional
surface alloy.
J. Appl. Phys., 1999) an unusual, ordered surface alloy of
manganese and cobalt, the magnetic configuration of which is
(A. Noguera, S. Bouarab, A. Mokrani, C. Demangeat, and
H. Dreyssé. Very thin
films on fcc
. J. Magn. Magn. Mater., 1996) an issue of
controversy.
Polarized electron reflection can provide an indicator of the
magnetization of the alloy, independent of the methods which have
previously been brought to bear thereon. To this end, the
polarizations of reflected electron beams at three energies from a
sample have been
measured.
The Mott polarimeter ,as improved by the measures described below,
was used to measure the polarization of the specularly reflected
electron beam (figure 3.3) from a
magnetic multilayer (figure 3.4)
grown by MBE.
![]() |
Under certain assumptions, and with the use of a range of experimental and mathematical techniques, designed to eliminate systematic errors, the measured left-right scattering asymmetries, representative of the reflected polarizations, were as shown in figure 3.6.
![]() |
It can be inferred from the non-zero polarization values (figure 3.6) that the part of the multilayer structure
(figure 3.4) within the penetration depth of
the electron beam has a non-zero magnetization component along
in the remanent state after application of a strong
magnetic field in the
direction. This does not, of itself, demonstrate
that the manganese and cobalt layers have parallel magnetizations, nor
that the manganese layer is internally ferromagnetic. It does,
however, demonstrate the feasibility of similar experiments which will
be capable of settling these issues.
Protein three dimensional folds can be complicated and difficult to interpret. Protein topology cartoons are a graphical form of simple two dimensional schematic diagrams whose aim is to simplify folds so that they can be more easily understood and compared. They represent a fold as a sequence of secondary structure elements and hold information about their relative orientation and spatial position. An example cartoon is shown in figure 1. Information about its interpretation is given in the caption. The topology cartoon shows the beta sandwich structure of the fold with the relative spatial and sequential positions of the constituent strands. This is much more clear than the equivalent three dimensional structure.
In the atlas, every poly-peptide chain of 30 or more residues in the 1st July 1997 release of the Brookhaven Protein Data Bank is represented, by the cartoon of a chain to which it has at least 95% sequence similarity. Extensive modifications were made to the TOPS program, which, as visual comparison with the three-dimensional structures revealed, increased the proportion of the cartoons which represented the structures well enough to require no manual redrawing, to 82%.
At present, access to the atlas is through Java applets on the web pages. Future plans include making a Java-free version of the atlas available, and maintaining the atlas to allow for changes in the content of the PDB.
| (1) |
The Bayesian world-view is found to differ from positivism in four
ways. Firstly, the positivist Occam's razor insists that
, where
is the number of postulates in
, and
is a normalizing constant to ensure
,
whereas in the Bayesian view,
is a subjective and arbitrary
choice. Secondly, positivism prohibits the entry of prescriptive
ideologies into knowledge, whereas Bayes' theorem allows inferences to
be drawn about prescriptive ideologies and descriptive theories alike.
Thirdly, a prohibition on theories
, for which one cannot conceive
of any evidence
, for which
, is sometimes associated
with positivism, whereas Bayesian analysis can assess many such
theories. Fourthly, any positivist prohibition on the consideration
of evidence obtained with an ideology in mind is another example of
insistence on the assignment of particular values to prior
probabilities. Therefore, Bayesians, like standpoint epistemologists,
will think such a prohibition inappropriate.
Bayesians view subjectivity as entering, inevitably, into academic study by four routes. Firstly, Bayesian inference cannot be performed without the use of a prior probability distribution, mirroring standpoint epistemologists' view that previous experience always affects the interpretation of evidence. For a Bayesian, the choice of prior probability distribution is arbitrary and subjective, and any attempt to achieve objectivity by claiming that a particular prior probability distribution is correct conceals this subjective choice, and renders it immutable. Bayesians conceptualize objectivity as the achievement of similar posterior probability distributions, from a range of prior probability distributions, mirroring standpoint epistemologists' view that theoretical beliefs need to be grounded by combining the conclusions of researchers with diverse previous experiences. If evidence has been noted, for which some theories have not produced likelihood values, a prior probability distribution can be devised that approximates the posterior probability distribution that the previous evidence would have produced, mirroring standpoint epistemologists' view that thinking on the basis of evidence, which has been obtained in the course of a marginalized lives, can improve the ability of researchers to interpret other evidence, whether or not they themselves experienced those marginalized lives.
Secondly, the Bayesian statistical decision theory uses the expected reduction, which an experiment will bring about, in an uncertainty function of the prior or posterior probability distribution, to judge the worth of an experiment, and therefore to choose experiments. It can be shown that every uncertainty function is associated with an ideology, for which it measures how much an experiment's results can improve the making of policy choices to implement that ideology. Bayesians may, therefore, suspect that claims that a particular piece of research is free of ideology conceal the inevitable influence of ideology in the selection of its experiments. This suspicion is shared with standpoint epistemology, and proponents of both traditions prefer to be open about the ideological motivation of their research.
Thirdly, ideology may also enter into academic study through attempts to produce a posterior probability distribution, in which the policy that will minimize the expectation of one's own loss function is the same policy that will minimize the expectation of the loss function of someone else with decision-making power. This possibility, against which Bayesian thinking can provide some protection, has been noted by standpoint epistemologists, as an abuse of science.
Fourthly, the prior probability distribution can affect the posterior probability distribution through experiment selection. In a toy problem, it is found that whichever of two theories has the higher prior probability is able to make an experiment that confirms it appear to be the most interesting experiment to undertake, and thereby to enhance its probability. This may be related to certain recent epistemological observations, outside of the standpoint epistemology tradition.
Physicists have a tendency to study phenomena at very large and very small length scales. This can be modelled as the result of experiment selection, under statistical decision theory, using a greedy top-down approximation to the Shannon entropy as the uncertainty function.
My most recent teaching assignment has been providing small-group classes, at second-year undergraduate level, in Classical Dynamics and Fluids, for Peterhouse.
I've also provided similar classes on a second-year undergraduate Methods of Mathematical Physics course, at Emmanuel College and Peterhouse.
While I was a post-graduate student, I provided the same type of classes on first-year undergraduate programmes in Mathematics for Natural Scientists and Physics, on behalf of Girton College.
In addition, I've undertaken team teaching of larger groups, in second-year undergraduate Advanced Physics practical classes, in Systems and Measurement, and Waves and Optics, at Cambridge University.
Copyright Daniel C. Hatton 2001-2005. Details of copyright.