Slashdot Mirror

Here are five ideas for a New Orleans House printed in Popular Science recently after Katrina hit. They are really good ideas.

ALSO, you might want to look into using these nails that were especially made for hurricanes/earthquakes. They will hold your house together a lot better.

Hope this works!

I suggest not. Some tinfoil hat designs can actually increase your exposure to radio waves.

Yet more piquepaille blog spam. a robotic cable inspection system is the one and only link to hit.

Actually it already happened once. Popular Science did an article on this a while back. Turns out we used to eat a banana nicknamed the Big Mike (unfortunately I don't see a Wikipedia article on it) but that was wiped out by disease, reversing the fortunes of several Latin America countries (see the history of the term Banana Republic). The PopSci article is pretty interesting, even if only for the history (if you're already familiar with the Cavendish issue).

http://www.popsci.com/popsci/science/806ffb24a5f27 010vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd/2.html

The Worst Jobs in Science
Pain, Tedium, Danger, Disgust, Humiliation--It's all just part of the average workday for the (often proud, more often smelly) members of our third annual honor roll of the Worst Jobs in Science

By John Galvin | October 2005

9. NASA Ballerina
Her dance partner is a supersensitive Robot

Give him an "A" for effort. Earlier this year NASA robot scientist Vladimir Lumelsky unveiled a revolutionary "skin" that will allow robots to sense the presence of astronauts and to move out of the way so that nobody gets hurt. Lumelsky's skin is being developed to assist in NASA's future space-exploration plans--trips that will rely heavily on robots. The current skin uses 1,000 infrared sensors to detect moving objects and then relays the data to the robot's "brain," which instantly signals the robot to skedaddle. Lumelsky envisions future skins with tens of thousands of infrared sensors able to withstand the extreme heat, cold and radiation of space travel. It's serious science, and Lumelsky, being a serious man, gave nary a thought to the fact that his prototype robot bears a striking resemblance to a giant phallus.

For the 'bot's public debut he hired a leotard-clad ballerina to dance with it (see for yourself:www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/mpeg/115084m ain_ballerina.mpeg). "It takes two to tango," Lumelsky e-mailed us, somewhat exasperated. "The astronaut must be able to turn his back to the robot and expect it to act adequately, like a dance partner. Our system does this; no other such systems exist.

"We humans are completely unprepared to see a machine behave (literally) like an animal," he added. "As with everything else in our culture, it wears off quickly, but it takes your breath away when seeing it for the first time." We'll say!

Anyone notice the SCSI LVD cable on page 4? Doesn't that seem a bit hack-ish for a real research lab? Seems a bit like finding duct tape and a rusty hammer in an Emergency Room!

There is this old article on Popular science:
Trans-Atlantic Maglev.

They mention speeds up to 4000mph, in a tunnel 150 to 300ft under the surface of the Atlantic. Horribly expensive (at least $25 million per mile), however.

This has been proposed often. See http://www.popsci.com/popsci/science/5e610b4511b84 010vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd.html.

There is still a limitation on speed. As the train approaches earth orbital velocity (abut 7.75 km/sec ), the centripedal force approaches the force of gravity (excuse my sloppy language), the passengers become weightless, and some will get "space-sick" ans start barfing all over the place.

Synthetic Blood: http://www.popsci.com/popsci/science/9e367f36fca9e 010vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd.html
It does not act like blood, but it carries oxygen more efficiently than blood.

Aging has to do with programmed cell death, if I recall correctly. Also, i believe most new blood cells come from the bone marrow; so, just having one red blood cell and letting it reproduce in solution seems much too simplified.

I suggest you read this before getting too carried away with that line of reasoning.

2 stroke engines are far more polluting than either 4 stroke gas or diesel engines. They must mix their oil with their fuel, creating an exhaust that cannot be cleaned up (well) with catalytic converters or urea injection. This is why they have been all but banned in advanced industrialized nations.

I think that this 'study' needs to be included on this list.

We're already deep in development! Popsci lists a varient of it in the magazine's "Cop tech 2010" Airstrike not included. Be well, citizen!

That sounds similar to an article I saw in Popular Science Check it out here.

119. Need a Home in a Hurry? Press Print
Jun 29, 2004
An oversize printer could speed up building construction.

Popular Mechanics is known for its deep knowlege North Korean technology.

By the way Popular Mechnaics, where is my flying car or personal submarine?

There are plenty of flying cars and personal submarines available. You just have to pay for your toys. (Or is it work related... for the new paper route?) :D

FWIW, they did a great job on their book: Debunking 9/11 Myths. I highly recommended it if you have seen a movie or web site that claims to show evidence that 9/11 was a US governemnt plot with controlled demolitions, or suggestions that the World Trade Center wouldn't collapse because the fire wasn't hot enough to melt steel, and you aren't sure what to make of it. This book will help get you on solid factual and scientific ground.

Bananas. They're cloned. All of 'em.

I think it means that it will "pop" the hood up just a little so that when they land on it, there is some "give". I don't believe it means that the hood will open so wide that they'll be *eaten* by the car.

See here: http://www.popsci.com/popsci/whatsnew/3ded9ee77c5d 9010vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd.html

Another great example... Just give this phone to the person you want to track and off you go:

http://www.popsci.com/popsci/how20/f88b973910a9a01 0vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd.html

Too bad a spell checker wasn't on the list of innovations.

http://www.popsci.com/popsci/flat/bown/2006/produc t_35.html

Take a look at this:
http://www.popsci.com/popsci/flat/bown/2006/produc t_35.html

Sweet Jesus! How many people that you know would spend $525 for a desk lamp? Maybe I can apply for a government grant or something.

http://www.popsci.com/popsci/whatsnew/2526081bfbcf e010vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd.html

Popular Science got one about a week ago, and broke it, so they made the best out of a bad situation.

The real danger here is a homogenized feed stock.

An analog would be the world's banana crop. There are a number of varieties of banana, but the one most often seen in the west, the Cavendish, has been bred to such a level of homogeneity that there are real concerns that a single disease could wipe it out worldwide. In fact, that's exactly what happened in the 1960s to the then-dominant banana, the Gros Michel (same link). Banana growers had to find a replacement variety that consumers would accept, then retool their operations around it. Big surprise, the disease that wiped that one out has already evolved to attack the Cavendish.

It's just like riding a bicycle!

Since it seems the ravening hordes have slagged Space.com's servers, I permission from Popular Science to post a link to their SpaceShipTwo story on the Popular Science website.

1) A book that I thought was awesome when I was in high school was "The Robot Builder's Bonanza." You can check it out. The material has held up quite solidly. You'll learn all about building robots to pick up cans of soda.
2) Hobby robot clubs. They're sprining up quite similarly to the computer clubs of old.
3) As already suggested, lots of people like mindstorms, but I've no personal experience with these.
4) Kits. You can purchase kits for a number of robots, including robot sumo competition kits.
5) Pyrobot. You might want to check it out. It's a software simulation kit (I think that it can drive some robots too) that was being pushed at AAAI-2005 for teaching robotics at the undergraduate and perhaps high school levels. It comes on a Linux LiveCD. It's mostly about writing software in python.

One thing to kick around. If a project that you want to do out of one of the older books asks for a computer... check out a less-expensive alternative. Most of these projects were written for hardware that is positively old and inexpesive by modern standards (it's been 10 years since I read The Robot Builder's Bonanza, first). If you have the cash and patience to learn about PICs, you might consider it time well spent later in life.

So, now you're looking at college perhaps? Major in computer science, mechanical engineering, or electrical engineering. Each focus on different facets that can be of use in robotics. If you're into cognitive science, psychology isn't a bad bet... I have no personal experience with that one though. I went computer science, which is also a fairly good route to cog sci if you go artificial intelligence.

The breakdown looks like this though:
Computer Science - Artificial Intelligence
Mechanical Engineering - Design & Control
Electrical Engineering - Control

If you want to go straight out into industry building robots, mechanical engineering isn't a bad bet. If you want to do research with humanoid robots and the like, computer science is your best bet. Mechanical engineering also has lots of good research in robotics, and you'll have more opportunities to fiddle with them as an undergrad. If you're in college, check out your school's Mechatronics course, they're becoming far more common.

Research will certainly require a PhD. I'm currently in a PhD program working in a robotics lab with a humanoid robot. It's very very very cool.

At any rate. If you're still in high shcool, starting out in high school isn't a bad bet, just make sure you keep up with your classes and grades. If you want to go the PhD route, the best thing to do is to go to a good undergrad school, get solid grades, and, most importantly, find a professor to do some work with... preferably research. Your letters of recommendation will make or break you for admission to a PhD program. Stay on the good side of your professors, at least three of them. Also, remember, it doesn't hurt to have a famous professor in your corner, but a professor who knows you better, but is less influential, is more helpful than a professor who is quite influential but barely knows you.

If you screw up any of the above steps, that's ok too. I definitely didn't do everything perfectly on my route here, but I still got into an exceptional school with a world-class lab and work with a professor who has made quite a name for himself.

Also, check out these cool pictures, featured in this month's issue of popular science http://www.popsci.com/popsci/technology/b671884322 63d010vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd.html If you're the reading sort, you might also enjoy the article that it accompanies. http://www.popsci.com/popsci/technology/d6a1884322 63d010vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd.html (It's by Ray Kurzweil)

1) A book that I thought was awesome when I was in high school was "The Robot Builder's Bonanza." You can check it out. The material has held up quite solidly. You'll learn all about building robots to pick up cans of soda.
2) Hobby robot clubs. They're sprining up quite similarly to the computer clubs of old.
3) As already suggested, lots of people like mindstorms, but I've no personal experience with these.
4) Kits. You can purchase kits for a number of robots, including robot sumo competition kits.
5) Pyrobot. You might want to check it out. It's a software simulation kit (I think that it can drive some robots too) that was being pushed at AAAI-2005 for teaching robotics at the undergraduate and perhaps high school levels. It comes on a Linux LiveCD. It's mostly about writing software in python.

One thing to kick around. If a project that you want to do out of one of the older books asks for a computer... check out a less-expensive alternative. Most of these projects were written for hardware that is positively old and inexpesive by modern standards (it's been 10 years since I read The Robot Builder's Bonanza, first). If you have the cash and patience to learn about PICs, you might consider it time well spent later in life.

So, now you're looking at college perhaps? Major in computer science, mechanical engineering, or electrical engineering. Each focus on different facets that can be of use in robotics. If you're into cognitive science, psychology isn't a bad bet... I have no personal experience with that one though. I went computer science, which is also a fairly good route to cog sci if you go artificial intelligence.

The breakdown looks like this though:
Computer Science - Artificial Intelligence
Mechanical Engineering - Design & Control
Electrical Engineering - Control

If you want to go straight out into industry building robots, mechanical engineering isn't a bad bet. If you want to do research with humanoid robots and the like, computer science is your best bet. Mechanical engineering also has lots of good research in robotics, and you'll have more opportunities to fiddle with them as an undergrad. If you're in college, check out your school's Mechatronics course, they're becoming far more common.

Research will certainly require a PhD. I'm currently in a PhD program working in a robotics lab with a humanoid robot. It's very very very cool.

At any rate. If you're still in high shcool, starting out in high school isn't a bad bet, just make sure you keep up with your classes and grades. If you want to go the PhD route, the best thing to do is to go to a good undergrad school, get solid grades, and, most importantly, find a professor to do some work with... preferably research. Your letters of recommendation will make or break you for admission to a PhD program. Stay on the good side of your professors, at least three of them. Also, remember, it doesn't hurt to have a famous professor in your corner, but a professor who knows you better, but is less influential, is more helpful than a professor who is quite influential but barely knows you.

If you screw up any of the above steps, that's ok too. I definitely didn't do everything perfectly on my route here, but I still got into an exceptional school with a world-class lab and work with a professor who has made quite a name for himself.

Also, check out these cool pictures, featured in this month's issue of popular science http://www.popsci.com/popsci/technology/b671884322 63d010vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd.html If you're the reading sort, you might also enjoy the article that it accompanies. http://www.popsci.com/popsci/technology/d6a1884322 63d010vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd.html (It's by Ray Kurzweil)

Being an astronaut is an incredibly hard job and I salute the brave men and women who risk their lives (and sanity) in the name of science. There's a reason something NASA related is a recurring theme in PopSci's "Worst Jobs in Science."

This is true. Popular Science did an article where the author kept a diary of the risks he was encountering and would rate them, then they showed the diary to risk experts and got comments. What you said is exactly correct: people downplay the risks of, say, riding in a car, because they do it so often, while they worry a lot more about the risks of flying - despite the fact that flying is far safer than riding in a car.

This was studied in regards to cannon launch - it does work, but is probably too complex to be comercially viable.

Every single time... please read the links, we are not talking about cannon launches here. We are talking about using the length of the tower to accelerate it.

The real killer in these types of designs is the accelarator - electromagnetics just don't work as well as most people think. High velocities are practically unatainable in reality.

Sorry, try again. Plenty of research shows that it can be done. Its just not financially worth it to put a maglev tunnell across the Atlantic ocean. Now 11km on the other hand is eminently feasable... :D

Space elevators have a low mass throughput rate and high maintainence costs

No, space elevators have no mass throughput rates and no maintenance costs, and thats because they don't exist and are unlkely to exist this century.

Reading about how a program can find something that a human could not, or would not, brings to mind a notion I had the other day.

I am learning Java (and OO programming best practices in general), and am pretty heavily into it at this point. I was tooling along, writing some code to test some aspects of the language when I suddenly realized that much of what I was typing I was kind of unaware of.

When I had first begun studying in earnest a few months ago I remember how closely I paid attention to the smallest syntactical details. But now that much of this has become wrote I found myself automatically just cruising through - not really conceptualizing what I was doing. But it was still working.

I went back into my little code and delved into a deeper reading of what I had written. It was all correct according to theory - and I could recall all the little subtleties of how Java's VM was interpreting this and that - but while I was writing it I was giving no thought to it. It just happened; it just came out of me.

Now, hearing about these programs that can mine data and find things that human eyes would miss - and relatedly hearing about machines that can invent - I wonder if one day invention, discovery and the like will all be wrote.

I wonder if, like my mindless coding moment, things will just happen - research will just occur - without really a second thought of the "low-level" processes that currently are held so dear.

It's interesting. It might be akin to mathematics in some ways - wherein you can generalize a large body of calculation and come to a conclusion without actually outputting the raw numerical form.

It is an approximation, yes. But with some work the approximation can be decomposed into elementary school level math expressions - if you really want to go through all that work.

But why decompose it, it works fine generalized (much better for humans in fact).

It's interesting to me - this modern high-level generalization.

Wouldn't, you know, the "terminator" crops all die... leaving us with just the good ones? What am I missing here? In any event, we already have this situation. Many of our crops are all clones, incapable of breeding: oranges, bananas, seedless grapes. All it takes is one disease to wipe the whole globe of that particular variety. Bananas are currently being wiped out, because every yellow Chiquita banana on the planet is a clone with the misfortune of not being able to survive a particular fungus: See this article for details.

http://www.popsci.com/popsci/computerselec/b49dd4d 03cb84010vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd.html

I had Jesus himself bless my computer. He loved all the porn, sweet sweet porn.

""Public relations firms have long used computer technology to create bogus grassroots campaigns, which are called 'Astroturf.' Now these firms are being hired to push illusions on the Internet to create the false impression of real people blogging, e-mailing and making films.""

Can You Tell Which Photos Are Real?
Take these quizzes to see how well you can spot digital tampering

Not quite like that, but how about a rocket bicycle. (Not that you can do much commuting on a bicycle in the area - it's just as car-ridden as the rest of the country.)

Oh, and there's Jesus as an Eggbeater and God's Rocket (the latter offering an eggbeater pic, too).

is a real technology. :)

Read about it at PopSci online

Maybe humans won't fix this mess but instead the machines will.

I was trying to remember where I somewhat recently read about this technology and thank you for reminding me that it was in Popular Mechanics.

you can't find it cause it was a Popular Science article i believe, i read it too.
a quick search of the popsci website found this:
http://www.popsci.com/popsci/whatsnew/bc0b041c0516 a010vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd.html?s_prop18=whatsne w

http://www.popsci.com/popsci/printerfriendly/medic ine/34f7cd8e5620c010vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd.html

It can become cheap, once enough people go for it. I'm surprised at how many naysayers are on this forum, possibly conditioned to believe that spiderman villains are villainous because they didn't get their superpowers "naturally".

There may be benefits to complete prosthetic bodies which have capabilities superior to flesh and blood which would make limb regeneration a less preferred alternative.

In the article Jeffrey Morgan notes that students at Brown have pierced noses. Limbs and skins impervious to flame, cold, bullets and infection might be the next big thing in body modification. Also, if you break your leg, you can take it down to the shop and get it fixed while the mechanic loans you a courtesy leg to get around in.

As for concerns to losing your humanity, it's not who you are inside, but what you do that counts.

Finally, is it just me, or does everyone want to strap on a combination of the Hugh Herr Catapult and the german built Powerskip mechanical jumping boot and go street racing?

It can become cheap, once enough people go for it. I'm surprised at how many naysayers are on this forum, possibly conditioned to believe that spiderman villains are villainous because they didn't get their superpowers "naturally".

There may be benefits to complete prosthetic bodies which have capabilities superior to flesh and blood which would make limb regeneration a less preferred alternative.

In the article Jeffrey Morgan notes that students at Brown have pierced noses. Limbs and skins impervious to flame, cold, bullets and infection might be the next big thing in body modification. Also, if you break your leg, you can take it down to the shop and get it fixed while the mechanic loans you a courtesy leg to get around in.

As for concerns to losing your humanity, it's not who you are inside, but what you do that counts.

Finally, is it just me, or does everyone want to strap on a combination of the Hugh Herr Catapult and the german built Powerskip mechanical jumping boot and go street racing?

Ah, never mind. I went over to the Pop-sci article and saw a picture of the wings in the configuration, and I agree with you now.

Sorry about the 'slashdot penis waving'.

Yeesh, it looks like one of those stupid $1 foam planes that are too delicate to get the wings on right.

http://www.popsci.com/popsci/aviationspace/0f2505a 52aceb010vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd.html

BMW was/is working on a system that captures the heat and uses it for steam power -- http://www.popsci.com/popsci/automotivetech/163cf5 1b6fd89010vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd.html

There already is a man who makes 1000 megapixel prints, he uses a large format film originally developed for U2 spy planes (9 x 18inch and supposedly the largest so I dont know where the guy mentioned in another comment got 20inch polaroid film) and then scans it to produce files that are reaching the 1000 megapixel mark, he's page is here and there was a popular science article about him, heres a link to the article here.

uh guys...?

i hate to burst your bubble....

http://www.popsci.com/popsci/technology/generaltec hnology/7beaa4dd497f6010vgnvcm1000004eecbccdrcrd/2 .html

and yes, I KNOW its not digital, but hey, it uses parts from a A7 spyplane, so that's gotta count for something right?

And what happens when retinal implant-type bionic eyes, take off?

I suppose "Mr. Smith, here are your new eyes; just watch out for movie theaters and the government." will be the standard disclaimer, huh?

I think that computers have actually been able to do real science for at least a little while already.
John Koza is a leader in field of genetic and evolutionary computation. Very much his computer's do real science. The computers analize a set of data (observation), they make a series of modifications (hypothesis), they run fitness tests against these modified versions of the data (experiment), then they begin again analizing these results (back to obeservation).

The computer clusters which John Koza has engineered have created high-pass and low-pass filters when given nothing more than a random assortment of electronic components; even while John himself knew nothing of electronics that would enable him to create such a circut himself.

Most impressively is how the computer cluster evolved a new antenna for NASA - when it was completed John was worried that the computer had made some grievious errors because the little antenna looked like a bent paper clip - but it worked!

And that's science if you ask me. Especially the antenna - the results of experiments can, and seeminly do, often go against "common sense" and give answers which are "unintuitive".

Perhaps computers will be much better with the next generation physics we're discovering. Perhaps our little numerical darlings are simply better suited to deal with the abstract, multi-dimensional world of what the universe is starting to appear to be.

(Please pardon my lay and simplified version of the scientific method - but I feel it is a valid interpretation (if overly simplified for minds such as mine ;) )
--
Music should be free

Growing New Heart Tissue

Although I tend to think that popular science articles like this one are more "look at the cool gadgets we want to exist in 20 years" rather than "look at the cool gadgets that will exist in 20 years," I think this article is very relevant to this topic, especially what you were saying about the heart regenerating itself after damage from minor attacks.