KU QuarkNet Week 2-3: Research Underway


Research Projects

The QuarkNet research assistants, all high school students or 2016 graduates, are hired to work in the Department of Physics and Astronomy. During this time, they are working with professors, graduate and undergraduate students, and others to contribute to ongoing research projects at the University.

Photos and Descriptions


Brittany and Ardrian jumped into assembling the QuarkNet Cosmic Ray Muon Detector.


Prof. Besson advises returning QuarkNet researcher Margot.


Sabrea, Asher, and Roxanna (seated) learn to operate and analyze the data from radio transmission and reception experiments.


Sabrea, Asher, and Roxanna (seated) learn to operate and analyze the data from the radio transmission and reception experiment.



Ardrian and Brittany find that commissioning a Cosmic Ray Muon Detector requires lots of testing, careful assembly, and light-tight tape.


Bennett, Margot, and Pierce collaborate on research. All three are returning QuarkNet researchers.


Within a couple of days, Ardrian and Brittany had the detector functioning and under test.



A particularly well-timed photo of Bennett and Pierce testing the revisions to their lightning detector, begun in the 2015 research season. Their device(s) are part of the TARA research at KU.


Bennett and Pierce delivered a preliminary talk about their research work and the hardware they have created to generate a trigger that includes directional and range information.


The audience at a typical research seminar includes professors, graduate and undergraduate students, and fellow QuarkNet research assistants.

QuarkNet is funded by grants from the Department of Energy and the National Science Foundation.


KU QuarkNet Summer Research 2016

Today we opened the KU Summer Research Session for our QuarkNet student researchers. We have several returning from last year’s crew, and quite a few new faces as well.

This is my fourth year with KU as the QuarkNet Summer Research Teacher. The best thing about the job is being able to help another generation of students learn about some extremely high level topics in a very hands-on way.

These high school students and graduates are not doing toy research — they are jumping in with both feet to contribute to ongoing research projects here at KU, from novel research in cosmic ray detection to writing code to help demonstrate particle physics ideas on the web to developing data analysis skills and techniques to analyze data from the Large Hadron Collider.

This brief note is just a placemarker; the interesting stuff will no doubt come in the weeks ahead.

Makerspaces in Classrooms

I ran across a listserv post I made about a year ago, and it’s something I still think is important. This was in response to a post about converting a classroom into a STEM lab. Here’s my thoughts with only minor edits:

I would recommend perhaps trying to make that STEM lab a full

​Make it a place where your community (students AND teachers) are welcome
to come learn how to use different tools to create, make, invent, and
experience things. I have done something like this with a very small corner
of my classroom, and while the supplies and topics are limited it does give
me a place (and resources) to teach an interested student how to solder,
test electronics, and build projects.

The Maker movement is not limited to any one technology, nor is it just
STEM.​ The new acronym STEAM incorporates the arts, and I believe that
creating Makerspaces/Hackerspaces in schools could be a step toward
reuniting the creative disciplines of science, engineering, and the arts.

With a properly equipped makerspace you could then offer, or could find
people to offer, seminars on woodworking, digital circuit design, robotics,
3d design and printing, fabric crafts and working with sewing and
embroidering, incorporating microcontrollers and programming in artistic
and fashion projects, woodworking, analog circuits, clay sculpture,
microcontroller programming, game programming, jewelry, crafting musical
instruments, creating analog and digital effects circuits (pedals) for
electric guitars…obviously I can’t list everything here.

Make it a space that is open, welcoming, and useful to people interested in
science, engineering, math, and arts.  Cooperate with the art, music, tech
ed, and other teachers to try and bridge the imaginary gap between the

R​esource​s​ you might look at:




New Science Facilities

Our community recently approved a bond issue to, among other things, replace our 1960’s era science classrooms. They are poorly equipped and woefully small.

I have been keeping a “wish list” to share with the architects and engineers during our consultations between now and the end of construction. We break ground in the spring.

Physics teachers, what classroom features, bulit-ins, and equipment would you consider essential to include in a new facility? What would be on your ‘wishlist’?

Please comment below and/or reply on twitter to http://www.twitter.com/jim_deane .

Fun with Tracker

Note from 29 Oct 2018: this post was originally drafted in 2014 and fell by the wayside; recent developments in Tracker derivatives on Chrome have brought it back to the forefront of my mind. Tracker is the most powerful, GNU GPL licensed (free and open) video analysis software I have used. It is more powerful than some commercial software with video analysis. The killer feature for me is auto-tracking, which is implemented with some intelligence built in.

Updates to come soon on a browser-based derivative of Tracker that is being developed by Luca Demian as discussed here.

Good video analysis is one of the best things to happen to physics teaching, learning, and understanding, it makes it so much easier to really dig into how objects move and interact.

Things don’t always go perfectly smooth — the auto-fit for this data was completely wrong, so I estimated values for the coefficients and constant in the sinusoidal model and then tweaked them to achieve a good fit.  In doing so, it helps reinforce what the different coefficients in the model stand for and do.

20141208 Tracker

In this example, the physical setup is an eleven coil section of a Slinky, salvaged from one that had been hopelessly tangled in the way we all know happens all the time.

The thought from that old draft was never finished, and I may have lost my notes from that experiment — but I think the tool is important and worth sharing. If the notes show up…I’ll continue the thought. -JD 29 Oct 2018

Spontaneous Calculation

Sometimes the most fun in class is when it skews off in a wildly unplanned direction.  Sometimes it’s a big skew, sometimes a little detour.

We have been studying particle physics topics in class for the past couple of weeks, including a trip to Kansas State University for a QuarkNet Master Class.  We were discussing in class that the data we used to determine the mass of the top quark came from the Tevatron at Fermilab, and that it was from a proton-antiproton collision.

Some of my students were a little incredulous at the thought of antimatter, asking “Isn’t that a science fiction thing?”  Yes, yes it is, but it is also very real.  There just isn’t much of it around, and that why exactly we have almost exclusively matter and no antimatter is a Really Good Question We Haven’t Solved Yet.  Although there is no significant amount of antimatter naturally occurring anywhere in the universe, such as no antimatter stars or planets or nebulae that we are aware of, we can manufacture it.

Manufacture it?  Yes, we can.  Particle colliders like the LHC do it all the time.  It is even created naturally in tiny quantities through certain types of radioactive decay.

“So,” one of my students asked, “how much would a pop can full of antimatter cost?”


That is a good question that deserves an answer.  After mentioning that I’m pretty sure we have not produced a pop-can full of antimatter of any kind in total, I was off to find the answer.

A Google search quickly came up with a NASA site from 1999 that quoted the cost of antihydrogen at $62.5 trillion per gram.  Sure, that’s 1999 dollars, but it will work for our purposes.

We needed a few other factors, like the density of liquid hydrogen (70.99 g/L), and the conversion from 12 fluid ounces to liters (12 Fl.oz. = 0.354882 L).  And with a quick calculation, we had our answer:  $1.57E15

That’s $1,570,000,000,000,000.

Over one and a half quadrillion dollars.

The discussion swayed to how many pop cans of antimatter you could buy if you could sell the entire planet, but by then the period was winding down and it was time to go.

It leaves me wondering…by the end of my teaching career, how far that cost for a pop-can full of antihydrogen might fall.