Slashdot Mirror

TFA asks: "Finally, are you one of those Nobel prizewinners who is going to go crazy now that you've won? "

The interviewer probably didn't know that Dr. Geim won the Ig Nobel for levitating a frog.

Between that and the fact that he cited saving taxpayer's money as a reason behind not filing a patent and his Friday experiments (which led to the scotch-tape on graphite) discovery, I think I have a new hero.

Yes, there is an error in the Fox News article. Here is a quote from the official site instead:

ECONOMICS PRIZE: The executives and directors of Goldman Sachs, AIG, Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns, Merrill Lynch, and Magnetar for creating and promoting new ways to invest money -- ways that maximize financial gain and minimize financial risk for the world economy, or for a portion thereof.

http://improbable.com/ig/winners/

...for the Ig Nobel prize ?!?

I hope he wins the Ignoble Prize. I think it would be a fitting honor. http://improbable.com/ig/

This looks to me like an attempt to win an ignoble prize. Just like this one, which was an actual winner: http://improbable.com/ig/2002/scrotal-asymmetry.pdf "Scrotal Asymmetry in Man and in Ancient Scupture"

The Annals of Improbable Research, a published journal, has been doing this since 1995. http://improbable.com/

- Current Subscriber
-- Has been since 1995
---Has every issue published since the start
---- Homemade zygotes. Just like Mom’s. BOX 48.

Sounds a lot like the Ig Nobel Prizes... http://improbable.com/ig/

Or you could just read the source for these sorts of stories going back twenty years.

Don't go comparing AU / UK to US TV viewing habits with comparing Apples and Oranges!

That's like comparing apples and oranges!

Maybe it's a similar effect to one of the conclusions from "A prompt plus delayed contingency procedure for reducing bathroom graffiti". When a space is well taken care of maybe people unconsciously realize that someone's paying attention to the space and act accordingly.

We've got to get this thing together with this guy.

That is alot of poop! Maybe a researcher could study this a go for the igNobel award.
http://improbable.com/ig/

Your post reminds me a little of the "Postal Experiments" that I remember reading about amongst some comments here on Slashdot nearly 10 years ago:

We sent a variety of unpackaged items to U.S. destinations, appropriately stamped for weight and size, as well as a few items packaged as noted. We sent items that loosely fit into the following general categories: valuable, sentimental, unwieldy, pointless, potentially suspicious, and disgusting.

It's tough to say what my personal favorite was, but I think the helium-filled balloon at least deserves special mention. :-)

A shoo-in! Nominate now at http://improbable.com/

This guy should be nominated for the igNobel awards.

The igNobel website:
http://improbable.com/ig/

Nominate an candidate. Like this fellow:
http://improbable.com/ig/miscellaneous/nominate.html

This guy should be nominated for the igNobel awards.

The igNobel website:
http://improbable.com/ig/

Nominate an candidate. Like this fellow:
http://improbable.com/ig/miscellaneous/nominate.html

The SF Chronicle columnist Herb Caen ran a story the next day saying that Teller was dressed as the angel of peace.

An interesting story about a man who was awarded the first Ig-nobel prize for peace:

for his lifelong efforts to change the meaning of peace as we know it.

IT and science aren't known for their amazing comic value

What about the Ig Nobel awards?

http://improbable.com/

This year's chemistry prize was split between two teams of doctors. One team discovered that Coke is an effective spermacide. The other team discovered that it is not.

Balls, I so much for not actually checking the links in the preview.

improbable.com

The official ig website with video, background and list of winners

Absolutely. The summary and linked article get it wrong. The Ig Nobel prizes are not about "irrelevant" research:

The Ig Nobel Prizes honor achievements that first make people laugh, and then make them think. The prizes are intended to celebrate the unusual, honor the imaginative -- and spur people's interest in science, medicine, and technology.
From the Ig Nobel Website

A lot of scientific research seems pointless or silly to people who don't know what it's really about or why it was done. Hence the regular "still no cure for cancer" and "I can't believe my tax dollars fund this" comments. The Ig Nobel prizes acknowledge that science can sometimes seem funny on the surface, but they definitely do not concede that it is irrelevant.

No idea. I only heard about it when some silly people wanted to post a balloon (and therefore pay negative postage based on weight). They refused based on this rule although I imagine it's really meant for compressed gas.

This raises other questions such as "why not specify compressed gas".

Personally I'd recommend against nominating them. The Igs are

I don't think I'd like to see them used to reward incompetence, or research based on contrived testing conditions and thereby leading to a foregone conclusion, which is what this is.

http://improbable.com/

Experiments have proven that red objects and blue objects exert the same gravitational force?

I don't think so. I'm pretty sure that if anyone had done the study, it would have been reported here.

I wonder if GP post was about the discrepancies in velocity of the Voyagers and some other satellites? It seems like gravity might have dependencies we don't know anything about.

Probably not color, though. Maybe shapes: maybe cuboidal gravity is different from spherical gravity is different from cylindrical gravity.

ok, tagging is beta, but shouldn't this one be tagged as "ignobel" instead of "darwinawards" ?

The Coral Cache version of the first two links:

http://en.wikipedia.org.nyud.net:8090/wiki/Annals_of_Improbable_Research

http://www.news.com/8301-10784_3-9837983-7.html?part=rss&subj=news&tag=2547-1_3-0-20&coral-no-serve

I couldn't find cache on the third link, but the original appears to be up-ish (Up but slow)

http://www.improbable.com/magazine

Hair is the source of all power.

http://improbable.com/projects/hair/hair-club-top.html

Much more different than apples and oranges

Apples and oranges can be compared, and to try and claim that they are significantly different is flawed. Here are two studies that back me up.
http://www.improbable.com/airchives/paperair/volum e1/v1i3/air-1-3-apples.html
http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/botrender.fcgi?bl obtype=html&artid=27565

Also, the fellow has a point, no matter that there are two or three levels of government taxing you, they are still taxing the same income. This is a flaw in federal systems. (In Australia, while both federal and state governments can raise taxes anyway they want (almost), the federal government is the only government that taxes income or has a sales tax on general items and services. The states have stamp taxes and the like, and the local councils rates. The federal government then provides most of the states their income (in fact the GST was intended to replace stamp duties, hasn't happened of course).

Bah. Karma Whore?

Here are two links that compare apples and oranges.

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcg i?artid=27565%22
http://www.improbable.com/airchives/paperair/volum e1/v1i3/air-1-3-apples.html

Basically, they are incredibly easy to compare. Simply get out a ruler, scales and other scientific instruments and measure each, then compare. Fucking easy.

And if you say that they are so obviously different, well not if you grind them down to a paste, heat them for fifty minutes at 48 degrees and then compare.

Come on, it is a stupid saying, get over it already.

But otherwise I think I agree with what you are saying.

Posting anonymously so that I can use my mod points

http://www.pubmedcentral.nih.gov/articlerender.fcg i?artid=27565%22
http://www.improbable.com/airchives/paperair/volum e1/v1i3/air-1-3-apples.html

Two links that compare apples and oranges.

Mod me up!

Try comparing apples to apples next time, please.

"Comparing apples to oranges" is perfectly valid. Please use a different silly analogy.

My favourite Ig Nobel laureates still have to be Jack & Rexella van Impe, who won the 2001 Astrophysics Ig Nobel ". . .for their discovery that black holes fulfill all the technical requirements to be the location of Hell."

I bet Scientist/Supermodel Symmetra could do it. http://www.improbable.com/airchives/paperair/volum e2/v2i3/v2i3-toc.html

And yes, these can be compared.

This has already been tried, in Australia. In fact, the law won an IgNobel prize for John Keogh and the Australian Patent Office for patenting the wheel in the year 2001. Apparently he did it to demonstrate that the new patent laws were pointless. I have no idea if his patent has ever been challenged in court!

Of COURSE we are hard-wired (in some manner) for geometry!!!

We're visual creatures operating in (a perceived) Euclidean space!

How could we not be (geometry-aware)?

As to the implication that we have some innate ability to reason geometrically, I think the folks at MSNBC and the AAAS must not have tried any mathematical proofs recently (or perhaps ever).

THERE's an area where there is ample evidence that we have zilch in the way of pre-wiring (a.k.a. "instinct"), and must undergo extensive pain and effort to wire ourselves to perform logical reasoning -- a skill that is foreign to most of the human population.

There's a pretty substantial chasm between the ability to recognize lines and shapes, and the ability to develop a method for bisecting an angle (using straight edge and compass) and showing that such a method is correct (i.e., develop a proof).

I don't know if anyone noticed, but the author of the original article is given as: Marc Abrahams is editor of the bimonthly magazine Annals of Improbable Research http://www.improbable.com/ and organiser of the Ig Nobel Prize. The /. discussion has been very inspiring, far beyond what Marc had in mind when he published this.

Comparing apples and oranges is perfectly valid...

http://www.improbable.com/airchives/paperair/volum e1/v1i3/air-1-3-apples.html

http://www.darwinmag.com/read/0502/apples.html

Scott A. Sanford of the NASA AMES Research Center offers this dubunking http://www.improbable.com/airchives/paperair/volum e1/v1i3/air-1-3-apples.html/(WARNING: this site often returns 404s) of the Apples and Oranges comparison myth at the HotAIR website. So I think our friends at Mythbusters should not use that particular analogy anymore.

On the other hand, Kansas is flatter than a pancake

On the other hand, Kansas is flatter than a pancake

In Australia, someone patented the wheel.

They even won an Ig Nobel prize for it (Technology, 2001).

There is nothing wrong with comparing apples to oranges.

Please see: Apples and Oranges -- A Comparison [www.improbably.com - Annals of Improbable Research]

I say socialize the monopolies. Turn them into government owned buisenesses like the USPS. The USPS is remarkably reliable. To give a recent anecdote: I ordered a hard drive from an internet buisness on the evening of Nov. 22. It was sent FedEx ground and I have yet to receive it. The tracking no shows it was picked up by FedEx on Monday. I ordered an external hard drive enclosure on Sunday and it was sent via USPS. I received the enclosure yesterday. Over the course of my life I have come to expect consitent good service from the USPS. I do not have near as high of expectations from UPS or FedEx, because they consitently disappoint.

If the telephone and cable companies were government owned, I would expect similiar levels of high service as to the USPS.

As an aside, buried on FedEx's website there is a notice as of October that they will no longer require signatures for any home deliveries. I would advise everyone to plan your holiday shipping accordingly.

This is comparing apples vs oranges.

Are you sure that you want to say this?

Comparing apples vs oranges is no longer considered valid :)

kansas is flatter than a pancake:
http://www.improbable.com/airchives/paperair/volum e9/v9i3/kansas.html

Well, Kansas is scientifically flatter than a pancake. http://www.improbable.com/airchives/paperair/volum e9/v9i3/kansas.html

He won a NOBEL prize. He literally swept the IgNobels, though.