Official website

Livestream

IG NOBEL PHYSICS PRIZE 2026 [CANADA, USA, CHINA, SAUDI ARABIA] Randy Hurd, Zhao Pan, Tadd Truscott, Kaveeshan Thurairajah, for theoretical and experimental attempts to design a splash-free urinal.

REFERENCE: “Splash-free Urinals for Global Sustainability and Accessibility: Design Through Physics and Differential Equations,” Kaveeshan Thurairajah, Xianyu (Mabel) Song, J.D. Zhu, Mia Shi, Ethan A. Barlow, Randy C. Hurd, Zhao Pan, PNAS Nexus, vol. 4, no. 4, April 2025, pgaf087. https://doi.org/10.1093/pnasnexus/pgaf087

WHO ATTENDED THE CEREMONY: Randy Hurd, Zhao Pan, Tadd Truscott, Kaveeshan Thurairajah

Having posted the result to r/Physics 7 years in a row (2019 2020 2021 2022 2023 2024 2025) I am finally at a ceremony!

You can explore different orbitals and see how they look visually. I hope this helps with your studies! 

Try it in your browser: https://gleyn-debug.github.io/quantum_atom_simulation/quantum-atom-model/

Source code: https://github.com/Gleyn-debug/quantum_atom_simulation/tree/main/quantum-atom-model

Hi r/Physics,

I would like to share a personal project that has been part of my life for more than twenty years. I have started working on the first version in 2004 as a small collection of physics experiments and visualizations. Over the years with many rewrites and long pauses in between it gradually developed into what is now called Makarov Physics Suite. I finally released it last month. The project currently contains about 140 interactive simulations covering classical mechanics, oscillations and waves, fluid dynamics, thermodynamics, electromagnetism, optics, quantum physics, nuclear and particle physics, relativity, astrophysics, and several computational or complex-system models.

The simulations are interactive rather than prerecorded animations, parameters can be changed while they run and many modules include live measurements, graphs, particle trajectories, field lines, presets, and small experimental tasks. Some of the more computationally intensive models can also use GPU computation (CUDA and OpenCL dependent on your graphic card). y main goal was to make physical relationships easier to explore visually: change a parameter, observe what happens, and compare the result with the relevant equation or theoretical prediction. I should stress that this is intended as an educational sandbox not as research-grade simulation software or a replacement for textbooks. Simplifications are unavoidable and after working on the project for so long I am sure there are things I no longer notice myself.

I would therefore genuinely appreciate critical feedback, particularly from people who teach or work with physics:

- Do any of the visualizations appear physically misleading?

- Are the controls, units and graphs understandable?

- Which simulations communicate their underlying idea well, and which do not?

- Are there important assumptions or limitations that should be stated more clearly?

- Is there an experiment or phenomenon that would be especially valuable to add?

The attached screenshots show only a small selection of the modules. I would also be happy to discuss the equations, approximations and numerical methods used in particular simulations. Full disclosure: I am the developer and the project is now a commercial release. I am posting primarily because I would value informed criticism and suggestions from the physics community.

Thank you for taking a look.

Link to the project: https://store.steampowered.com/app/4861360/Makarov_Physics_Suite/

Some videos you can find on my youtube channel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oN5-ebZba0g

Not new but super interesting paper by Laetitia Bettman and John Goold from Trinity.

There is relation between Fisher information rates - how fast probability distribution (sorta) is changing - and entropy production in far from equilibrium systems. Paper attempts to consider this in a quantum context, which is tricky because non-commutativity means you have multiple legitimate inequivalent generalizations of the Fisher metric.

They decompose rate of change of the density matrix to classicalish part (eigenvalues/populations) and a quantum part (coherences/rotated eigenbases. The contribution from the classicalish part is the same across the family of otherwise inequivalent quantum Fisher information metrics.

That part lets you talk about changes to the rate of change of entropy for GSKL systems that satisfy local detailed balance

They take all this machinery and tweak some bounds and limits, and explore the quantum thermodynamic Mpemba effect (unfortunately goes completely over my head but sounds very cool)

If there were truly a singularity, the angular momentum would have accelerated to approaching infinity, no?

In fact, can't we take the mass, the estimated mass and spin of the original star and compare that to the present angular momentum of the black hole to determine how 'big' the 'singularity' is? or at least put some bounds on it?

Just like how you can form an illusion of 3D image on a 2D paper. Can you apply the same concept of a 4D illusion on a 3D plane? (I can’t sleep)

I am attempting to replicate some results done in VASP with Quantum Espresso. One thing I notice about both packages is that VASP appears to converge much sooner than Quantum Espresso, with a slightly smaller k point grid size and much lower plane wave cutoff.

For people who have had experience with both, generally speaking what other parameters should I be mindful of that don't map to each other? I'm using LDA pseudopotentials and not working with hybrids.

Having recently completed my physics degree, I was wondering if there any were any apps or websites with structured exercises that I could implement into my weekdays (30 – 60 minutes per day). I’m not sure if I want to study a postgraduate qualification but I’d still like to retain most of what I’ve learned and keep my chops up with respect to calculus etc.

Apologies if I’m not entirely clear, I’m hungover to death 💀

So for SG o level, now students are taught to use “internal kinetic energy” across different schools. Is this the correct terminology? I checked the 6091 syllabus and no mention of internal KE. So why schools across sg are marking internal KE as a keyword. (No marks for KE, must use INTERNAL KE).

Help. Are we cooked? Teaching (wrong) keywords and memorization rather than concepts and understanding.

Detailed and interesting autograph letter signed by physicist Erwin Schrodinger, one of the pioneers of quantum physics who won the Nobel Prize in 1933 for his Schrodinger Equation.

In the 1950s, Schrodinger also worked with Albert Einstein and physicist Behram Kursunoglu on creating a Unified Field Theory -- the attempt to reconcile quantum physics with the Theory of Relativity -- referred to in scientific literature as the Einstein-Schrodinger-Kursunoglu theory. In this letter to Kursunoglu, Schrodinger expresses his rather extreme displeasure with Kursunoglu's conclusions regarding the Unified Field Theory.

Dated 15 October 1951, letter reads in part, ''Dear Mr. Kursunoglu, I have no time to study your paper now. I am amazed to the extent of finding it difficult to believe, that the modification you suggest, should entail

a.) the equations of motion for a charged mass particle[?] to be about what is to be expected from older theories, and

b.) the electromagnetic field acting as a source of the gravitational potential in much the same way as one would expect from Einstein's theory & Maxwell's theory.''

He then writes a cutting but diplomatic note, ''I advise you to check upon this very carefully, to see whether your astonishingly brief reasoning is really valid.''

Schrodinger then comments upon work done by Max Born, noting that one of Born's conclusions was ''marred by a mistake that remained for a long time unnoticed.'' He then writes that a calculation mistake done by Kursunoglu is ''incorrect, fortunately! Stronger fields than 200,000 Gauss have been produced. Moreover, if Born's non-linearity would come into play at the order of, say 50,000 Gauss, this would have been noticed long ago. / Yours truly / E. Schrodinger.''

Unified Field Theory was a dream never realized by either Schrodinger or Einstein, with the elusive reconciliation of all physics disciplines still waiting for the next Nobel Prize winner to crack.

Two page letter on a single sheet of stationery from the Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies, School of Theoretical Physics measures 8.25'' x 10.5''. Tape repair at edge of center fold, else near fine condition. Accompanied by Kursunoglu's original letter to Schrodinger dated 13 October 1951, where he writes in part, ''I have now completed a detailed account of the new version of the unified field theory.''

This item sold on Aug. 27 at Nate D. Sanders Auctions $6,875.