The Top Ten Physics Highlights of 2002
Ocelot Wreak writes "Physics Web has a cool summary of The Top Ten Physics Highlights of 2002. These include anti-atoms, neutrino oscillation - a finding that requires new physics beyond the Standard Model, defying the second law of thermodynamics, and using neutrons to measure quantum gravitational effects, amongst others. For some reason, the Slashdot Effect and the latest research on iPod-based Beowulf clusters were not included..."
Just marry the poor fool. ;-)
LongTail SSH Brute Force analysis tool is here!
Congrats to you both!
PS: This lameness filtering obviously is optional, as you get away with a 4 chr post, while I had to type this whole postscript to get past some silly minimum # of characters per line.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
so when do we get the Top Ten Top Ten Stories of 2002?
"12. Hope for the future More than 300 physicists from around the world -- most of them women -- met in Paris in March for the first International Conference on Women in Physics."
In a related story: Sex makes your brain grow
But the last two points are just "Low points of the year" and "Hope for the future".
The lowpoints... you guess it, the great sham by Victor Ninov on Ununoctium.
The hope is... more women in physics! Oh the joy! You guys in Physics should be happier now... :-) If only this happens as well in Computer Science...
--
Error 500: Internal sig error
This is a common misconception. Trying to get more groups invloved in science (art, etc) is not just social engineering. It is also an attempt to make science better. The more people lend their talents, the better it will be. This is obviously true in sports, as African-Americans became able to join professional teams. As Jesse Jackson once said, "we never knew how good football could be until everyone could play". The same is true for science: we will never know how good it can be until everyone can participate.
What "women want" is highly influenced by what paths in life seem available or attractive to them. This is hardly something one is born with, but much more likely the product of cultural atmosphere. The fact that there are more American women scientists than Afnagni ones makes this obvious. A restrictive environment of possibilities acts as a real barrier to entry for women, many of whom don't even think of themselves a spossible scientists. And all of that is prior to active prejudice on the part of others.
My mom is a chemist and she had to fight like hell her whole life just to work, much less to do that work and still be considered a woman. Anything that makes science more viable for all individuals sense of identity is positive, and clearly benefits science.