While I'm sure other countries will get in on a project of this magnitude, I think both the/. summary and the original article in the Toronto Star are incorrect, I've never heard of a U.S. Herzberg Institute for Astrophysics, and I would be very surprised if one existed, since Gerard Herzberg was a Nobel Prize (chemistry) winning Canadian scientist. Not only there, there is already a National Research Council of Canada Herzberg Institute for Astrophysics in Victoria. A quick google search also didn't show any "U.S. Herzberg Institute".
Your "colleagues" aren't very clever, since air is significantly worse at thermal conduction than a table-top, or even the book that they are sitting their laptops on.
Maybe if they just left them sitting on a desk they wouldn't notice them heating up so much?
I have a younger sister, and it isn't surprising to see that her generation doesn't like email. I say this because:
a) instant gratification, as stated above. We live in an even more 15-second world then when I was a kid.
b) (and I think this is the more important one) they have nothing to say to each other. Aside from planning events on weekend evenings and such, the IM conversations I've seen between teens amount to little more than inane chatter. (I think we could even go so far as to lump 90% of all IM conversations in the inane chatter category, no matter the age of the chatters.)
Agreed, part of what I like so much about Futurama is its high(er) quality animation compared to just about any other animated show out there right now.
That it didn't outlive The Simpsons is a terrible shame.
Why should I end it with IANAS? IAAS, I Am A Scientist.
All you need to do is look at the group of people he has working with him at the Foresight Institute to realize he is a total crank.
His degree from MIT is from the AI lab. How that relates to Nanotech is not obvious. There have also been no other Molecular Nanotechnology PhDs awarded from MIT (as far as I know). Go Figure.
Nanosystems is the book I was referring to in my original post. It has nothing in it that an undergrad QM, Stat Mech, or various Chemistry books don't already contain. THERE IS NOTHING NEW THERE!
I agree he has fancy credentials, but at someone below responded, he is quite the con artist. Show me some ACTUAL, IMPORTANT _SCIENCE_ that he's done in the past 10 years, and I'll retract my claims. Good luck finding any!
Many people regard him as the father of nanotech? Like who? The media likes to play him up as somehow being more important than he is (such as having him publicly argue with Richard Smalley), but in reality he is a crank. His real peer-reviewed papers are publications from 20 years ago. His "famous" books are simply regurgitations of already well known physics and chemistry. He appeals to non-scientist well-wishers and visionaries (he seems to have a fascintation with life-extension, in an unhealthy way), but to actual scientists, he is a crank. Plain and simple.
Um, wasn't Episode II generally regarded as a much better movie than Episode I? Checking IMDB, EP II is the 14th highest grossing movie of all time in the U.S.... that doesn't sound abysmal to me.
I've seen lots of posts saying "this has nothing to do with room temperature superconductors, but really cold gasses!" and whatnot.
The point is that the pairing formation of these fermions is potentially related to the Cooper pairing in electrons (also fermions). While it obviously isn't going to lead directly to a high temperature superconductor, the better we understand the mechanism IN GENERAL, the easier it will be for materials scientists and other condensed matter physicists to start figuring out how to get the critical temperature of REGULAR, SOLID superconductors up.
Published by the World Transhumanist Association. That inspires LOTS of confidence that it's not a bullshit "journal". Gimme a break.
I'd also like to point out that Chris Phoenix has a Masters in Computer Science. Not physics, biology, chemistry. Nothing that relates to the kind of physical science you need to truly appreciate what is happening at the nanoscale.
I am far more inclined to believe a Nobel Prize-winning Chemist than a nanotech enthusiast.
Slashdot Mirror
1mm taken off of each leg from an ant *is* a significant amount.
I thought this was a really cool paper too, and it would be really interesting to know in greater detail how exactly they count their steps.
:)
And if some alien race comes down to do the experiment on us, I hope they attach stilts to my legs rather than creating stumps out of them.
Okay, it depends on interpretation. From the original parent:
This is all assuming that you gain more energy than you're losing with this method.
I read this as just a violation of conservation of energy, which is strictly first law stuff. You are right if you treat the system different.
While the second law is certainly a fun law, it is the first law of thermodynamics that invalidates gaining more energy than you lose.
You sound awfully bitter, did you fail physics in university or something? :)
While I'm sure other countries will get in on a project of this magnitude, I think both the /. summary and the original article in the Toronto Star are incorrect, I've never heard of a U.S. Herzberg Institute for Astrophysics, and I would be very surprised if one existed, since Gerard Herzberg was a Nobel Prize (chemistry) winning Canadian scientist. Not only there, there is already a National Research Council of Canada Herzberg Institute for Astrophysics in Victoria. A quick google search also didn't show any "U.S. Herzberg Institute".
Shame on The Star.
If you are going to be pedantic, you should at least put in the right form of the equation.
E=[(pc)^2 + (mc^2)^2]^(1/2)
Apple/iTMS to become a ``record label.'' Maybe they'll just buy Apple Records and get it over with. :)
Your "colleagues" aren't very clever, since air is significantly worse at thermal conduction than a table-top, or even the book that they are sitting their laptops on.
Maybe if they just left them sitting on a desk they wouldn't notice them heating up so much?
The B is BSD stands for Berkeley. They were Stanford kids. Isn't it obvious? :)
I have a younger sister, and it isn't surprising to see that her generation doesn't like email. I say this because:
a) instant gratification, as stated above. We live in an even more 15-second world then when I was a kid.
b) (and I think this is the more important one) they have nothing to say to each other. Aside from planning events on weekend evenings and such, the IM conversations I've seen between teens amount to little more than inane chatter. (I think we could even go so far as to lump 90% of all IM conversations in the inane chatter category, no matter the age of the chatters.)
It is hard to write an email about nothing.
Direct from the website: This page was last updated on Monday, 12 August, 2002 12:22 PM.
:)
Given that it is three years old, this must be a dupe!
Agreed, part of what I like so much about Futurama is its high(er) quality animation compared to just about any other animated show out there right now. That it didn't outlive The Simpsons is a terrible shame.
I must have missed the memo, what makes a newfie not "kanuck"?
Mathmetical? That's not even a typo! :)
Does it crack anyone else up when people say "seamless integration with Windows!"? :)
Haha, yeah really. They are down from 1 in every 3 phones to MORE than one in ever four! The horrors!
Why should I end it with IANAS? IAAS, I Am A Scientist.
All you need to do is look at the group of people he has working with him at the Foresight Institute to realize he is a total crank.
His degree from MIT is from the AI lab. How that relates to Nanotech is not obvious. There have also been no other Molecular Nanotechnology PhDs awarded from MIT (as far as I know). Go Figure.
Nanosystems is the book I was referring to in my original post. It has nothing in it that an undergrad QM, Stat Mech, or various Chemistry books don't already contain. THERE IS NOTHING NEW THERE!
I agree he has fancy credentials, but at someone below responded, he is quite the con artist. Show me some ACTUAL, IMPORTANT _SCIENCE_ that he's done in the past 10 years, and I'll retract my claims. Good luck finding any!
Many people regard him as the father of nanotech? Like who? The media likes to play him up as somehow being more important than he is (such as having him publicly argue with Richard Smalley), but in reality he is a crank. His real peer-reviewed papers are publications from 20 years ago. His "famous" books are simply regurgitations of already well known physics and chemistry. He appeals to non-scientist well-wishers and visionaries (he seems to have a fascintation with life-extension, in an unhealthy way), but to actual scientists, he is a crank. Plain and simple.
Mac OS X.
What I see are people trying to copy Mac OS X. What was that about Windows again?
You have to assume some *slight* amount of intelligence on both parts.
... Are there large numbers of fish being found dead in the lake?
... Large numbers of dead fish were not found in Yellowstone Lake, or any other lake in Yellowstone.
Q:
A:
Seems like a pretty direct answer to the question.
Um, wasn't Episode II generally regarded as a much better movie than Episode I? Checking IMDB, EP II is the 14th highest grossing movie of all time in the U.S.... that doesn't sound abysmal to me.
I've seen lots of posts saying "this has nothing to do with room temperature superconductors, but really cold gasses!" and whatnot.
The point is that the pairing formation of these fermions is potentially related to the Cooper pairing in electrons (also fermions). While it obviously isn't going to lead directly to a high temperature superconductor, the better we understand the mechanism IN GENERAL, the easier it will be for materials scientists and other condensed matter physicists to start figuring out how to get the critical temperature of REGULAR, SOLID superconductors up.
In that regard, this is big news.
Yeah, "peer-reviewed". By who, exactly?
Published by the World Transhumanist Association. That inspires LOTS of confidence that it's not a bullshit "journal". Gimme a break.
I'd also like to point out that Chris Phoenix has a Masters in Computer Science. Not physics, biology, chemistry. Nothing that relates to the kind of physical science you need to truly appreciate what is happening at the nanoscale.
I am far more inclined to believe a Nobel Prize-winning Chemist than a nanotech enthusiast.