Beam Dynamics and Beam Losses - Circular Machines

A basic introduction to transverse and longitudinal beam dynamics as well as the most relevant beam loss mechanisms in circular machines will be presented in this lecture. This lecture is intended for physicists and engineers with little or no knowledge of this subject.Comment: 18 pages, contribution to the 2014 Joint International Accelerator School: Beam Loss and Accelerator Protection, Newport Beach, CA, USA , 5-14 Nov 201

Beam Transfer and Machine Protection

Beam transfer, such as injection into or extraction from an accelerator, is one of the most critical moments in terms of machine protection in a high-intensity machine. Special equipment is used and machine protection aspects have to be taken into account in the design of the beam transfer concepts. A brief introduction of the principles of beam transfer and the equipment involved will be given in this lecture. The main concepts of machine protection for injection and extraction will be presented, with examples from the CERN SPS and LHC.Comment: 22 pages, contribution to the 2014 Joint International Accelerator School: Beam Loss and Accelerator Protection, Newport Beach, CA, USA , 5-14 Nov 201

Hegel, Reason, and Idealism

In this article I want to focus on the central role that scientific reason plays, for Hegel, in leading us toward idealism, yet its complete failure to adequately establish idealism, and, oddly enough, the way in which this failure turns into a most interesting success by anchoring idealism and thus preserving us from solipsism. To bring all of this into relief, I must attend to Hegel’s differences with Kant

Introduction to Marx and Modern Political Theory: From Hobbes to Contemporary Feminism

I first began to study Marx some twenty-three years ago. In those days there were many things that made it easy to become interested in Marx: among them the political ferment of the late 1960s and the fact that at the University of California at San Diego, where I was a graduate student, there were several important and interesting Marxists - Fredric Jameson, Herbert Marcuse, and Stanley Moore. The latter two were my teachers in the Philosophy Department, and the latter, to whom this book is dedicated, became my dissertation director. Moreover, the spirit of Marx was in the air and it seemed necessary to read him to understand what was happening in the world. Despite the political ferment of the late 1960s, there were things that made it difficult for me to accept Marx at first. As an undergraduate, I had studied in a great books program at St. Mary\u27s College of California, and the Philosophy Department at UC San Diego, very much under the influence of Richard Popkin at that time, took a history of ideas approach to philosophy. There were things about Marx that seemed at odds with my whole educational background. Some of his texts, especially the Communist Manifesto, made him seem like a sort of communist Descartes, like someone who would sweep aside all past culture, tradition, and morality-as if there were nothing of value to be found there-and start over with a clean slate.

Marx, Justice, and the Dialectic Method

An interesting controversy has recently been provoked by Allen Wood. He argues that capitalism, for Marx, cannot be faulted as far as justice is concerned. For Marx, the concept of justice belonging to any society is rooted in, grows out of, and expresses that particular society\u27s mode of production. Justice is not a standard by which human reason in the abstract measures actions or institutions--there is no eternal, unchanging norm of justice. Each social epoch gives rise to its own standard; each generally lives up to it; and each must be measured by this standard alone. Thus, in Wood\u27s view, capitalism is perfectly just for Marx.

The structure and method of Hegel\u27s Phenomenology

H. S. Harris is one of the great Hegel scholars of our era. I want to present a view different from his of how Hegel\u27s Phenomenology of Spirit is organized, what it is trying to do, and where it is trying to go. I hope my disagreements with Professor Harris will succeed in being dialectical; that is, that they will give rise to contradiction that allows for the generation of further insight. The proclaimed task of the Phenomenology is to educate, train, or culture ordinary consciousness, to raise it to the level of what Hegel calls science -or true knowledge.1 The Phenomenology is a movement from the simplest form of knowledge, senseI knowledge, all the way to abaolute knowing, that is, total, all-encompassing knowledge

Labor, the State, and Aesthetic Theory in the Writings of Schiller

This essay is concerned with Schiller, but it investigates themes that can also be found in other writers, especially in Hegel and Marx. All of these writers attempt (and ultimately fail) to work out a particular ideal model for labor and political institutions. This model was patterned after the ideal cultural conditions of ancient Greece and based upon modern aesthetic concepts, espe cially the concept of a synthesis between sense and reason. It was a model designed to overcome fragmentation or alienation in the modern world that had been brought about by the development of the division of labor

Nietzschean Genealogy and Hegelian History in the Genealogy of Morals

I would like to offer an interpretation of the Genealogy of Morals, of the relationship of master morality to slave morality, and of Nietzsche\u27s philosophy of history that is different from the interpretation that is normally offered by Nietzsche scholars. Contrary to Nehamas, Deleuze, Danto, and many others, I wish to argue that Nietzsche does not simply embrace master morality and spurn slave morality.1 I also wish to reject the view, considered simply obvious by most scholars, that the iibermensch develops out of, or on the model of, the master, not the slave.2 And to make the case for all of this, I want to explore the relationship between Hegel\u27s master-slave dialectic and the conflict Nietzsche sees between master morality and slave morality. That Nietzsche does not intend us to recall the famous master-slave dialectic of Hegel\u27s Phenomenology as we read the Genealogy of Morals, I find difficult to believe. Yet very few commentators ever notice, let alone explore, this connection. Those who do, like Deleuze, Greene, and Houlgate, think that Nietzsche, in direct opposition to Hegel, simply sides with the master, not the slave, and that Nietzschean genealogy renounces all Hegelian dialectic - or any sort of Hegelian developmental view ofhistory.3 I do not think any of these views are correct. I wish to argue that Nietzsche is very much influenced by Hegel and that Nietzschean genealogy and Hegelian history are intimately linked in the Genealogy of Morals. Thus I think that there is a limit that must be put to the recent tendency, otherwise most insightful and illuminating, to see Nietzsche as radically postmodem, as totally breaking with the nineteenth century, and, certainly, as having little to do with Hegel

Eternal Recurrence and the Categorical Imperative

The question has been raised whether Nietzsche intends eternal recurrence to be like a categorical imperative. The obvious objection to understanding eternal recurrence as like a categorical imperative is that for a categorical imperative to make any sense, for moral obligation to make any sense, it must be possible for individuals to change themselves. And Nietzsche denies that individuals can change themselves. Magnus thinks the determinism “implicit in the doctine of the eternal recurrence of the same renders any imperative impotent…. How can one will what must happen in any case?” At the other end of the spectrum, those who do hold that eternal recurrence is like a categorical imperative, for their part, tend to ignore or deny the determinism involved in eternal recurrence. This article explores the extent to which it can be claimed that eternal recurrence is like a categorical imperative without downplaying Nietzsche\u27s dterminism

Kant\u27s Political Theory and Philosophy of History

Kant combined two traditional approaches in his political theory, reference to a utopian and ideal universal moral order in common with Plato, Thomas More, and Jean Jacques Rousseau and an analysis of the pursuit of individual self-interest leading to the establishment of laws that enable citizens to satisfy their interests, like Thomas Hobbes, Niccolò Machiavelli, and Adam Smith. Kant focused on the international level, arguing that following the categorical imperative would arrange a society equitably while national commercial self-interest would lead to a league of nations to adjudicate international disputes. Kant was unique in providing both a theory of an ideal society and a method to achieve it