Before we totaly bash this person consider nearly everyone with a physics major has some deal of of experience with *nix. Learning to use some version is an important part of educating future physical scientists. Physics and Linux practically go hand in hand because we are always squezing money and always using big servers.
Maybe the students AND the teacher should work on this project of porting to Linux since nearly every physics dept requires programming computer experience beyond the usual MS programs of the masses.
This may or may not be a dangerous example. (YMMV). In the world of Firearms the manufacture of new automatic firearms and conversions from semi-auto to auto has been outlawed since 1986. However, the KNOWLEDGE of how to produce such conversion kits is not illegal. In fact, the details (even blueprints) of conversion kits are posted frequently throughout the net as well as various explanations of how machine guns work as well as sold in stores. Only the ACT of MANUFACTURING a NEW ILLEGAL KIT OR FIREARM is illegal. If one tries to apply this to software, what "they" are trying to prevent is software piracy. So only the actual ACT of PIRACY should be illegal, not the knowledge or blueprint (aka software) of how to do it.
Except the correct order should be Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn if they were indeed lining up in order of closest to the sun. Saturn is the furthest naked-eye visible planet.
Effecient Powere transmission--no power loss due to resistance in the transmission lines.
Extremly sensitive sensors: A macroscopic effect is that the magnetic field is fixed inside a superconducting ring. When the field changes, the superconductor generates a field to keep the field at its original value (to a limit of course). The amount of current is then easily measured and very sensitive measuresments can be done. This is all done at low temp now (450 below zero Far) but at room temperature you can see there things propogating into consumer electronics. Imagine one of those in a hard drive read head--your denisty could be HUGE and you have this nice tiny little sensor to read it all---
Well I guess it depends on how you say SR is affected. The transformations from one frame of reference to another are unaffected. Now its just that c could possibly be smaller or larger. The fundamentals of the theory remain unchanged, only the numbers you punch in are different. Its on the scale of doing more precise measurements of the speed of light. SR is only affected in that the result you get is slightly changed--the underlying theory is unaffected. Its like calculting gravity force and suddenly we improve the Gravitational constant measurement. Well the numbers we get from the theory are all slightly different, but the underlying theory is unchanged. Special Relativity does not care is the speed of light is 1 m/s or 100 m/s. Its just cares that objects transform according to certain laws.
Well this is big, but not in the way most people will think. The constant they speak of, alpha, is the fine structure constant which is very important in fundamental high energy physics and cosomology. Its also important to note that since alpha = electron charge ^2 / (planks constant x speed o light) that any one of the three could be the culprit in changing or it could be some eacky quasar problem since we don't really know what quasars are for sure.
I doubt this affects General Relativity very much because GR is a non-quantum theory, while alpha is a quantum mechancis issue. Of course this may help develop a quantum gravity theory (Special relativity is different and completely unaffected, its main idea is that everything is relative and is unaffected by whatever alpha and c and the electron charge are).
In addition the paper does call for further study, and of course the CURRENT universe in unchanged (sorry still no FTL). However, this is an insight at the very fundamental levels of quantum mechnanics which is very closely tied to cosmology. String theorys and all of that ilk may be able to acount for this but the day to day shmoe will probably not know the difference. Still it is an important result that begs for more study and of course the bloody theory people will be all over this (It doesn't show I'm experiemtal branch does it). What this does boil down to is a insight into the fundamental interactions between the smallest bits of the universe. Of course we probably are going to need quite a few more before we sort out Grand Unified Theory, but this may be one of the big steps along the way.
One last caveat. Alpha also changes with energy, and as one causes more energetic reactions (like those done at fermilab) Alpha will increase. This could be a source for explanation, but I am only speculating. Theres a lot of wild stuff at the top physics levels going on.
Well maybe I came off too harsh in my first post.
I get irritated when people claim to have breakthrough technology and all they have is breakthrough research;).
I agree that this research needs to be pursued, but my point was not to hold your breath that anything is going to come out of it and point out some reasons why.
Please allow a bit of clarification:
First, this technology is a LONG way off and still in its infancy. Current projects have a big advantage over this in that they already have $$ and time behind them. SO this will have to play catchup. It may very well do it and if it makes my life better than I be happy.
Second, in the development some unforseen problem could junk the whole project. Now it is a good idea to develop this and try and overcome the problems that come up. Alternate solutions are always good. Never quit the project becuase of what might happen. But something always happens
And yes I realize that future technology is always decades behind. What I meant to clarify is that the existing infrastructure for what is used currently is a huge inertial barrier to change. Given that Si may bottom out on us in a few years that may overcome some barriers. If this technology only provides an incremental upgrade it probably will be left on a shelf somewhere unless there is nothing else. Whether or not thats good, we may never know. For a big switch in tech you need a big improvment to over come price and difficulty (usually).
Understand that I am all for research and new ideas but I guess I am tempered by all the hurdles I know new stuff has to pass to become 'mainstream.' Sometimes it kills really cool ideas, but it happens.
Not to be a total wanker on the parade but this is money down the drain. Why?
1. Becuase this technology has (currently) no way of being controlled to a point of being put in circuit. To put these crystals in a chip they have to be formed basically on the chip via some lithography method. So until technology devlops a way to put these cyrstals in a specific place this is all a bunch of cool but useless. 2.
2. "Researchers heat a mix of an organic solvent called hexane and a hydrocarbon ligand known as octanol to 450 degrees Celsius inside a titanium chamber." Yeah, this is gonna go over great in the fab community. Now we have to redesign our lithgoraphy to take place indide a titanium chamber at 450 C.
3. Price to performace. A lot of people make claims about new technology but when it comes down to it the reason we have our current tech is becuase its cheap(Comparitively) to put 20 million tranistors on a chip. This new techonolgy is several decades behind and probably will cost A LOT more. There are a lot of techonolgies better than Si transitors but the reason we use it is beacuse in the end comapnies sell a product, not get Tenure at a university. Technology breakthroughs from universities are exteremly importatnt but when they go off claiming to revolutionize commercial industry they are only fluffing there own feathers. Wait until a real company starts inversting in it and not some sucker venture capitalist.
Now in order to be flammed evenly on all sides let me say that there is no one particular solution for everyone. In fact, ANY of the major distributions are fine for beginers becuase the Linux community has tried (IMHO) in recent years to accomidate some of the "troubles" of first time users and made the install process pretty friendly. That being said each distribution still has its problems. For instance, if you had an Abit motherboard with the High Point Chip you were screwed with Red Hat 6.X series if you had hard drives on your ata-66 channels. Linux still requires you to do a bit of background work on what ditribution is good for you, but this is good thing. I think its still in the best interest to check newsgroups and the web for background because it gets you into the whole Linux community instead of being an isolated bump on a log and leads you into being a more interactive user.
Slashdot Mirror
Before we totaly bash this person consider nearly everyone with a physics major has some deal of of experience with *nix. Learning to use some version is an important part of educating future physical scientists. Physics and Linux practically go hand in hand because we are always squezing money and always using big servers.
Maybe the students AND the teacher should work on this project of porting to Linux since nearly every physics dept requires programming computer experience beyond the usual MS programs of the masses.
How about ADOM. Its a great Rogue like game. Addictive as heck as well. Here it is
This may or may not be a dangerous example. (YMMV). In the world of Firearms the manufacture of new automatic firearms and conversions from semi-auto to auto has been outlawed since 1986. However, the KNOWLEDGE of how to produce such conversion kits is not illegal. In fact, the details (even blueprints) of conversion kits are posted frequently throughout the net as well as various explanations of how machine guns work as well as sold in stores. Only the ACT of MANUFACTURING a NEW ILLEGAL KIT OR FIREARM is illegal. If one tries to apply this to software, what "they" are trying to prevent is software piracy. So only the actual ACT of PIRACY should be illegal, not the knowledge or blueprint (aka software) of how to do it.
Except the correct order should be Mercury, Venus, Mars, Jupiter, Saturn if they were indeed lining up in order of closest to the sun. Saturn is the furthest naked-eye visible planet.
Effecient Powere transmission--no power loss due to resistance in the transmission lines.
Extremly sensitive sensors: A macroscopic effect is that the magnetic field is fixed inside a superconducting ring. When the field changes, the superconductor generates a field to keep the field at its original value (to a limit of course). The amount of current is then easily measured and very sensitive measuresments can be done. This is all done at low temp now (450 below zero Far) but at room temperature you can see there things propogating into consumer electronics. Imagine one of those in a hard drive read head--your denisty could be HUGE and you have this nice tiny little sensor to read it all---
Well I guess it depends on how you say SR is affected. The transformations from one frame of reference to another are unaffected. Now its just that c could possibly be smaller or larger. The fundamentals of the theory remain unchanged, only the numbers you punch in are different. Its on the scale of doing more precise measurements of the speed of light. SR is only affected in that the result you get is slightly changed--the underlying theory is unaffected. Its like calculting gravity force and suddenly we improve the Gravitational constant measurement. Well the numbers we get from the theory are all slightly different, but the underlying theory is unchanged. Special Relativity does not care is the speed of light is 1 m/s or 100 m/s. Its just cares that objects transform according to certain laws.
Well this is big, but not in the way most people will think. The constant they speak of, alpha, is the fine structure constant which is very important in fundamental high energy physics and cosomology. Its also important to note that since alpha = electron charge ^2 / (planks constant x speed o light) that any one of the three could be the culprit in changing or it could be some eacky quasar problem since we don't really know what quasars are for sure.
I doubt this affects General Relativity very much because GR is a non-quantum theory, while alpha is a quantum mechancis issue. Of course this may help develop a quantum gravity theory (Special relativity is different and completely unaffected, its main idea is that everything is relative and is unaffected by whatever alpha and c and the electron charge are).
In addition the paper does call for further study, and of course the CURRENT universe in unchanged (sorry still no FTL). However, this is an insight at the very fundamental levels of quantum mechnanics which is very closely tied to cosmology. String theorys and all of that ilk may be able to acount for this but the day to day shmoe will probably not know the difference. Still it is an important result that begs for more study and of course the bloody theory people will be all over this (It doesn't show I'm experiemtal branch does it). What this does boil down to is a insight into the fundamental interactions between the smallest bits of the universe. Of course we probably are going to need quite a few more before we sort out Grand Unified Theory, but this may be one of the big steps along the way.
One last caveat. Alpha also changes with energy, and as one causes more energetic reactions (like those done at fermilab) Alpha will increase. This could be a source for explanation, but I am only speculating. Theres a lot of wild stuff at the top physics levels going on.
Well maybe I came off too harsh in my first post. I get irritated when people claim to have breakthrough technology and all they have is breakthrough research ;).
I agree that this research needs to be pursued, but my point was not to hold your breath that anything is going to come out of it and point out some reasons why.
Please allow a bit of clarification:
First, this technology is a LONG way off and still in its infancy. Current projects have a big advantage over this in that they already have $$ and time behind them. SO this will have to play catchup. It may very well do it and if it makes my life better than I be happy.
Second, in the development some unforseen problem could junk the whole project. Now it is a good idea to develop this and try and overcome the problems that come up. Alternate solutions are always good. Never quit the project becuase of what might happen. But something always happens
And yes I realize that future technology is always decades behind. What I meant to clarify is that the existing infrastructure for what is used currently is a huge inertial barrier to change. Given that Si may bottom out on us in a few years that may overcome some barriers. If this technology only provides an incremental upgrade it probably will be left on a shelf somewhere unless there is nothing else. Whether or not thats good, we may never know. For a big switch in tech you need a big improvment to over come price and difficulty (usually).
Understand that I am all for research and new ideas but I guess I am tempered by all the hurdles I know new stuff has to pass to become 'mainstream.' Sometimes it kills really cool ideas, but it happens.
Not to be a total wanker on the parade but this is money down the drain. Why?
1. Becuase this technology has (currently) no way of being controlled to a point of being put in circuit. To put these crystals in a chip they have to be formed basically on the chip via some lithography method. So until technology devlops a way to put these cyrstals in a specific place this is all a bunch of cool but useless. 2.
2. "Researchers heat a mix of an organic solvent called hexane and a hydrocarbon ligand known as octanol to 450 degrees Celsius inside a titanium chamber." Yeah, this is gonna go over great in the fab community. Now we have to redesign our lithgoraphy to take place indide a titanium chamber at 450 C.
3. Price to performace. A lot of people make claims about new technology but when it comes down to it the reason we have our current tech is becuase its cheap(Comparitively) to put 20 million tranistors on a chip. This new techonolgy is several decades behind and probably will cost A LOT more. There are a lot of techonolgies better than Si transitors but the reason we use it is beacuse in the end comapnies sell a product, not get Tenure at a university. Technology breakthroughs from universities are exteremly importatnt but when they go off claiming to revolutionize commercial industry they are only fluffing there own feathers. Wait until a real company starts inversting in it and not some sucker venture capitalist.
Now in order to be flammed evenly on all sides let me say that there is no one particular solution for everyone. In fact, ANY of the major distributions are fine for beginers becuase the Linux community has tried (IMHO) in recent years to accomidate some of the "troubles" of first time users and made the install process pretty friendly. That being said each distribution still has its problems. For instance, if you had an Abit motherboard with the High Point Chip you were screwed with Red Hat 6.X series if you had hard drives on your ata-66 channels. Linux still requires you to do a bit of background work on what ditribution is good for you, but this is good thing. I think its still in the best interest to check newsgroups and the web for background because it gets you into the whole Linux community instead of being an isolated bump on a log and leads you into being a more interactive user.