My second article with Majalah Sains has just been uploaded. It is about neutrinos. Some may ask why would I want to write on something in whch I have not done proper research on. Particularly I'm a bit anxious on how our real researchers will react to the article. I did refer to their earlier article in Majalah Sains out of respect. As a contributing author, I thought it would be good for the magazine to have article(s) of current interest (neutrinos in this case given the recent Nobel Prize in Physics). Indeed that was my intent to promote better understanding of neutrinos but with a different take on the subject (mine would be its mathematical structure).
While I'm not a neutrino physics expert, I do have interest in the topic. I took several particle physics courses in my BSc., Part III and PhD studies. In that respect, I do have the necessary background to say something I guess, but more than that, my B.Sc. (Hons.) thesis was on Minimal SU(5) GUTs and its modifications and these would include the topic of neutrinos. Of course, at the time, neutrinos are considered massless. With neutrino oscillations, that has changed. Thus, I thought it would be nice for me to update myself on the topic of neutrino masses. I thought I would be able to use simple 2×2 matrices to demonstrate the more common knowledge of matrix diagonalization in dealing with the mismatch between flavour and mass eigenstates of the neutrinos. With neutrinos being neutral, there are two possibilities i.e. introducing Dirac masses and Majorana masses.Then I found I had to introduce too many things to make the introduction accessible. I finally decided against the original idea and suffice for the article, to introduce verbally the main concepts without the mathematical details. To do it properly, one would have to do a mini course at least.
This year's Physics Nobel Laureate is Francis Halzen. He happens to be the author of the book Quarks and Leptons with Alan Martin. I have the book for quite sometime and was my reference book on particle physics even before I studied for Part III. Unfortunately, I did not have the book during my final year honours project; my main reference then was Langacker's Physics Reports article. The book by Halzen & Martin that I had, was a present given to me by my late eldest brother (may Allah forgive him and be placed among the righteous; regretted that I was not able to be with him in his final hours and attend his funeral).
Alan Martin was one of my lecturers in Durham University. He taught us Introductory Particle Physics; we had to take courses during the first year of PhD. Having learned Particle Physcs quite substantially during my Honours year, I remembered my attempt of looking intelligent in Alan's class by asking a subtle question about isospin. He immediately pointed out my confusion on the topic. It was later that I realised I had mixed up between strong isospin and weak isospin (should be kept separate). This demonstrates that learning with humility is better than learning with a sense of arrogance (often disguised as self-confidence).
So when I wrote the article, the attitude I adopted is for the betterment of my understanding of any subject of interest, more than anything else. I no longer have to chase formal academic recognition but one thing I still do have is the pushback against stereotyping or belittlement particularly in technical areas. At this old age, being humble is relatively easier (though one has to keep on guard not to let ego slip through) and that drives my interest even at this late stage. Being an average Joe, I know that I have many gaps in my understanding and I do wish I can close this gap wherever I can before I go. Depite my sometime fatalistic attitude (accepting fate), it does not reduce my sense of agency. I can only recall this hadith:
"If the Final Hour comes while you have a shoot of a plant in your hands and it is possible to plant it before the Hour comes, you should plant it."




















