I'll give you $10 for a magnetic monopole.
I didn't notice a science thread so here goes. Post about science related topics here!!
I was reading about the Tesla Museum indiegogo campaign and it seems I just missed the boat.
There was a indiegogo campaign to build a Tesla Museum at Tesla's old laboratory in New York because some developers wanted to knock it down and build a retail park or something like that.
They ended up raising 1.3 million and getting the state to set aside 850K so they can save the property.
For those who may not know, and I doubt many in America do, Tesla was the genius behind our modern alternating current electrical system.
Ray Kurzweil gets hired on to google as a director of engineering, fulltime position, for machine learning and language process. He has his detractors, but his analysis of technological growth is usual spot on. Where he seems to misstep is technology to marketplace. Even then, I listen to this guy and I agree with his general theory.
I saw this video on youtube, I was going to post it on the conspiracy thread, but I guess it's not actually a conspiracy until the US denies it amirite?
Video is about a Yugoslavian documentary saying they sold the space technology to the US so they could catch up to the Russians in the 60's.
I think it's still premature to claim they found the higgs boson though. At best they can say they discovered a new boson and are still trying to prove its the higgs.
Nearly everything in that list is pre-mature. It's like a list of the top 27 things that fake tech news sites have over-stated in 2012.
Fuckin' Nazi Tuco comin in and raining on my parade.
Now that this thread has been brought to my attention when I'm not drinking, should I add "Science" into the Tech forum?
IDK, up to you guys I guess.
I considered science a broad / general topic and technology just one aspect of science.
They still need to test it more to prove it acts completely like the higgs, but for the most part, yes it's proven to exist. It's properties aren't understood enough yet to make the claim for it being completely proven though.
Last edited by Flunklesnarkin; 01-04-2013 at 04:24 PM.
Are you saying James Cameron did not go down to the Mariana Trench? Are you saying Voyager hasn't left the influence of the sun?
I mean, the possible applications of some of the tech may be overstated, but there's nothing in there that is premature or overstated.
Whenever I see those "list of accomplishment" articles I think of all the vintage science magazines and how the old achievements look to me today.
I mean yes the ideas are sound and interesting to read about, but to think all of the items on the list will make it to mass production or general use in the method portrayed isn't quite accurate.
Speaking of vintage science magazines!!
edit, and looking at that magazine wtf 25 cents in states but only 10 cents in Canada.
Last edited by Flunklesnarkin; 01-04-2013 at 04:58 PM.
Some of the stuff (The things you picked) is factual. The problem is that these tech sites always pick up some novel research that some researcher is exaggerating, then dumb it down by overstating its current state of progress and imagining up real-world applications.
What are your main objections? Because looking that over, I don't see a lot of things that are terribly overhyped in any way (Obviously outside of that planet being pristine wedding ring diamond colored, which is obviously ridiculous.)
Deep learning was given a particularly audacious display at a conference last month in Tianjin, China, when Richard F. Rashid, Microsoft’s top scientist, gave a lecture in a cavernous auditorium while a computer program recognized his words and simultaneously displayed them in English on a large screen above his head.
Then, in a demonstration that led to stunned applause, he paused after each sentence and the words were translated into Mandarin Chinese characters, accompanied by a simulation of his own voice in that language, which Dr. Rashid has never spoken.
The feat was made possible, in part, by deep-learning techniques that have spurred improvements in the accuracy of speech recognition.
Dr. Rashid, who oversees Microsoft’s worldwide research organization, acknowledged that while his company’s new speech recognition software made 30 percent fewer errors than previous models, it was “still far from perfect.”
“Rather than having one word in four or five incorrect, now the error rate is one word in seven or eight,” he wrote on Microsoft’s Web site. Still, he added that this was “the most dramatic change in accuracy” since 1979, “and as we add more data to the training we believe that we will get even better results.”
One of the most striking aspects of the research led by Dr. Hinton is that it has taken place largely without the patent restrictions and bitter infighting over intellectual property that characterize high-technology fields.
The article explained that there has been a significant jump in AI which was in contrast to your position that there won't be intelligent computers in our grandchildren's lifetime.
How can you be sure that there won't be further breakthroughs over the next 100 years?
That said, there are lots of potential paths forward. In my view, language processing is a particularly compelling one because we know that it contains the kinds of recursive structures that come with human languages and (more simply) because our conscious trains of thought are so firmly rooted in language. So again, it isn't at all that I'm saying these things are impossible, but we should recognize the reality of what's going on with the actual bleeding edge of science and technology.
How prescient of you to predict that something is not inevitable within three generations.
The difference between a true AI and something people actually want is becoming increasingly academic as we improve our processing and software. Shit like SIRI isn't a true AI system, but it sure is intelligent and artificial.
Given the current state of the art, Kurzweil could easily be wrong on any timescale that might be relevant to talking about whether or not he got it right or wrong.
More evidence that we're just in a big software simulation and the programmers used an unsigned variable to determine energy.Originally Posted by Article
As a layman this sounds extraordinary and very suspicious. Like the dudes that said they got a particle to accelerate FTL.
Just reading your quote and not the article it looks like more semantics gymnastics, which is the most annoying thing about theoretical physics from my layman's POV.
Definitely need some kind of verification on something like this.
Wouldn't this conflict with the second law of thermodynamics?
Entropy never decreases?
I'm confused but whatever, negative temp woo woo. Does that mean perpetual motion machines?
edit.. here is a better description of what was done than the huffington post provided.
It sounds like this implies a perpetual motion machine or something close to it.
Last edited by Flunklesnarkin; 01-06-2013 at 01:02 AM.
Mention of Perpetual Motion machines within first page, call me a fool but I want someone with Sci cred and a nice speaking voice to come out and sell me on such business.
I'm sure detractors will pop up in a few days once they have had a chance to go over all the information.
It probably is just an intentionally head line grabbing article to rustle some jimmies and get funding.
Last edited by Flunklesnarkin; 01-06-2013 at 01:42 AM.
Just read up on negative temperatures. This isn't necessarily a new discovery, rather I think this is one of the first times they've been able to achieve this quantum phenomenon in labs and it seems only certain systems are able to produce negative temperature. In this case, lasers were used. The process is above my current knowledge to really understand, so I won't bother explaining. However, I think most of the confusion is the idea of negative temperatures. It seems like it wouldn't make sense under thermodynamics but apparently it does, if you break down a few things:
It does make sense, but its hard to wrap your head and actually visualize such a phenomenon.Originally Posted by Wiki
As far as endless energy, be mindful that even if this phenomenon was potentially limitless 'energy' for motion, the requirements to even achieve this system is beyond anything other than knowledge building - even remotely useful in technology is quite some time off.
Last edited by kaosu; 01-06-2013 at 01:36 PM.
I don't really have anything meaningful to contribute to the actual discussion of the phenomenon, but at the very least, I can offer an article that doesn't use the words "wacky" and "bizarro" to describe science. Maybe that will help?
Calculators, how do they fucking work? You're numbers are off though. at 89 cents an hours that $21.36 a day, which is $7,769.40 per year. Granted my numbers were off a bit, but yours were way off.
I wasn't sure where to put this article about the Fukushima clean-up, but since it talks about the development of new technologies to remove cesium from the environment I think this is appropriate even though there is a sad element of politics and nepotism. The well connected construction company's workers have left hundreds of garbage bags full of soil and other contaminated items all over the place. https://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/08/b...denounced.html
“What’s happening on the ground is a disgrace,” said Masafumi Shiga, president of Shiga Toso, a refurbishing company based in Iwaki, Fukushima. The company developed a more effective and safer way to remove cesium from concrete without using water, which could repollute the environment. “We’ve been ready to help for ages, but they say they’ve got their own way of cleaning up,” he said.
Shiga Toso’s technology was tested and identified by government scientists as “fit to deploy immediately,” but it has been used only at two small locations, including a concrete drain at the Naraha-Minami school.
Instead, both the central and local governments have handed over much of the 1 trillion yen decontamination effort to Japan’s largest construction companies. The politically connected companies have little radiological cleanup expertise and critics say they have cut corners to employ primitive — even potentially hazardous — techniques.
Saw a link on CNN where they finally captured video of a live giant squid (26 feet long) in the Pacific, but they didn't show the damned video ;( Just some still photos.
I thought some Japanese science crew were the first to film it a few years back? This guys pictures are much more clear though.
Edit: I thought your post said they were the first, my bad.
The gas they brought to negative temperatures is made up of potassium atoms. http://www.nature.com/news/quantum-g...e-zero-1.12146
Another peculiarity of the sub-absolute-zero gas is that it mimics 'dark energy', the mysterious force that pushes the Universe to expand at an ever-faster rate against the inward pull of gravity. Schneider notes that the attractive atoms in the gas produced by the team also want to collapse inwards, but do not because the negative absolute temperature stabilises them. “It’s interesting that this weird feature pops up in the Universe and also in the lab,” he says. “This may be something that cosmologists should look at more closely.”
Anyways, I was reading this article about this girl who doesn't age normally. Pretty interesting stuff. She's 20 years old but looks like she is a toddler.
Apparently they are splicing here genes into fruit flies and such to see how it makes them age.
The Worst Scientific Mistakes, Missteps and Misdeeds of 2012
Among other comments, Baumgartner suggested to The Daily Telegraph that NASA’s exploration of Mars is a waste of money. “That little knowledge we get from Mars I don't think it does make sense,” Baumgartner said to the Telegraph.
Twitter parody account @SarcasticRover had a few bits to offer in response, including “I hope #Felix remembers to thank NASA for practically EVERY PIECE OF EQUIPMENT that helped make him the man he is today.”
Figured this doesn't really need it's own thread in the book house, but anyone have any suggestions on books about Physics? Looking for something which deals in the subject in an entertaining manner while still being accessible someone who dropped high school science at the first opportunity, kinda like Dawkin's books did for me with biology.
" I wonder if you are destined to be forgotten. Will your life fade in the shadow of greater beings?"
If the first, then you might want to try one of Brian Greene's books like The Elegant Universe or The Fabric of the Cosmos. The Elegant Universe was made in to a pretty good documentary as well.
I look forward to someone getting their jimmies rustled by the mere mention of string theory.
Anyone follow http://www.planetaryresources.com/ or asteroid mining in general? Throwing up an asteroid analysis satellite into space and finding an asteroid made out of pure platinum or uranium or loose women with big tits seems too good to be true.
Let me know when they start hiring space marines to protect the asteroids from other companies.
I feel like space laws will become more defined as necessary. If the US govt ropes a baseball field sized chunk of Iridium into low Earth orbit and starts mining it, you can bet your ass there will be some serious legal battles that will change the dynamic of 'you can't own anything' if a bunch of Indians start stealing it.
If you're interested in cosmology/astrophysics, I really liked Martin Rees' Just Six Numbers. The Whole Shebang by Timothy Ferris is also great for an overview of cosmology, though both are a bit old by now.
For a broad undersanding I always find it most useful to study the history of a science, You can watch the evolution of concepts. and if its anything like asimovs history of chemistry that was a pleasure to read.
Last edited by fanaskin; 01-20-2013 at 02:46 PM.
It's the redbull guy falling faster if he weighs more discussion all over again. That was on other forum right? Reading the comments will make you want to stab your eyes out. We need a constitutional amendment laying this out once and for all.
I normally like the 1veritasium channel but they are way over simplifying the issue
Last edited by Blazin; 01-23-2013 at 01:17 PM.
Fucking Galileo proved this shit over 400 years ago!! Goddamn it, might as well have a bunch of people figuring that the sun revolves around the earth and all those newfangled ideas like the fact that Saturn has rings on it.
Question regarding the speed of light: the speed of c is lower through transparent materials (say, water). If light were to pass through this medium then re-enter a vacuum does it accelerate back to 186,000 miles/sec? If so, where is it obtaining the energy to do this? Furthermore, can a photon loss all energy and come to rest? If not, why not?
Edit... video discusses your question. tldr Light doesn't slow down it takes a longer path maintaining it's speed which does not change.
Last edited by Blazin; 01-23-2013 at 03:45 PM.
Asteroid mining's main issue is processing AND returning the stuff to Earth. If that is not cost effective, then the whole enterprise becomes somewhat pointless. The profit has to exceed operating costs. Every returned load will essentially need a re-entry capsule. Unless you can manufacture them in space, then every single one will need to be delivered to the asteroid or LEO. I could maybe see some space station where ore/mineral loads are delivered and then xfered to a re-entry capsule, although this still requires something ferrying materials to and from the mining site.
If they can find a way to reliably deliver re-entry modules to space without using rockets it might become more viable.
Here is a list of some non-rocket based space launch ideas. The only ones that appear potentially workable at this time are the space gun or the ram accelerator. They look to be able to send materials into space significantly cheaper than rockets. Talking like 1/8th to 1/40th the cost.
I imagine the reason that technology isn't being worked on in earnest right now is there is no demand to send massive amounts of materials into space at present. They still have to prove they can rope asteroids into orbit before the idea becomes a less risky investment imo.
Last edited by Flunklesnarkin; 01-23-2013 at 06:46 PM.
Actually that asteroid mining company announced their plans just the other day, it would appear that they intend on manufacturing shit in space using 3D printers. So they could well make re-entry modules.
In the longer term, the company hopes to process asteroid ores and manufacture devices in space using a 3D printing technology it has patented. The technology, called MicroGravity Foundry, can create high-strength metal components in zero gravity, the company says.
Stephen Covey, another member of the company's board, said Deep Space believes that manufacturing in space is the "first step" toward large platforms and settlements in space.
I think that's a good long term goal to use 3D printers to make re-entry modules. Of course they have to figure out how to power the printers. I'm skeptical solar power alone would be enough to manufacture a re-entry module.
I don't think 3D printers are a viable idea right now with the state of development in the technology. I doubt they could make complex computer navigation systems to land a re-entry ship / module at an airbase or space port.
I was imagining them doing something with parachutes dropping the goods into the ocean or a desert somewhere. I don't think a hard landing is much of a concern with raw materials as long as it doesn't hit hard enough to get vaporized.
Not super studied on parachutes but I don't believe they are able to be packed with any sort of automation at this time. It has to be done by a human to have any sort of reliability when deployed.
Last edited by Flunklesnarkin; 01-23-2013 at 08:58 PM.
The light doesn't lose energy passing through objects, even if its speed is temporarily slowed.
And finally, thats a hard question to answer succinctly. We believe that light that loses energy loses frequency, not speed. As for why? Good question. Most text books, and the video linked above sum it up as "Its just that way, deal with it.", but use fancier words, and since I don't have anything better I'll go with that. We can see and measure the effects of light extremely well, and we know many things about it to a great degree of accuracy, but your question can only be answered by philosophy at the moment.
Edit - just realized there's a video above explaining it :/
Last edited by Lenas; 01-23-2013 at 09:32 PM. Reason: I'm dumb.
The other thing to keep in mind is that the resources produced from asteroid mining is worth far, far more in orbit than it is on the ground. Hence the concept of building things in space with it. Instead of paying thousands of dollars a pound to launch a bunch of metal in to space, it might be a lot cheaper to launch mining and manufacturing drones that will produce ship components, fuel and the like in orbit from asteroids.
Or you could crash it into the earth and harvest it that way, but the asteroid would need to be of a specific size in order to do that. Rest assured, any asteroid brought into orbit will not be anywhere near a planet killer. That said, it can do some seriously extreme damage to a populated area. Current research is on attaching a shit load of wings/parachutes/retrorockets and guiding it into the desert. It will be a long time before anyone can redirect an asteroid as a terrorist act. Once we have the technology to do this on a regular basis (bringing them in will still take years if not decades), it will be feasible to properly police the "asteroid shipping lanes."
Current aerospace companies already have to deal with ITAR (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interna...ms_Regulations), and the oversight will only get tighter as this becomes more routine. Just about anything that can go into space is a "weapon" under ITAR, so there'll be a lot of oversight. The first several asteroids harvested will likely be crash landed as a proof of concept and for a quick $ grab. Once it's proven (by show casing several raw tons of platinum on TV or something like that), you'll see a lot more invested in harvesting them in orbit. Like Eomer mentioned, most of the need for the materials will be in space anyways, without much reason to bring it back to earth with a few exceptions (gold etc.)
The biggest thing you're like to see brought down to earth in any real quantity is the creation of metal foams as gravity screws up the terrestrial manufacture of steel foam. Metal foams are extremely durable and lightweight, they're just a bitch to do it gravity. One of the first mass-produced space-import money makers you'll see in zero-g is metal foam.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)