They all start with caveats. They point out that gravitons are missing. The first article points out that the model is applicable over a wide range, not a fundamental theory that purports to explain all physical phenomena. Compare with a statement like "quantum mechanics is one of the pillars of modern physics" in Wikipedia's article on Quantum Mechanics. Even the last article you quote, which looks like it's aimed at kids, is happy to point out lots of issues with SM. I think it's pretty clear that the Standard Model has a quite different status in the eyes of physicists to theories like QM and GR. For example many physicists study all kinds of models that are not based on SM, for example String Theory. But very few physicists study alternatives to QM or GR. Studying alternatives to SM is standard stuff, studying alternatives to GR and QM is controversial.
Maybe the problem you point out is in the popular press. They have a habit of making science stories seem absolute, and then take great delight in reporting when these absolutes no longer seem to be valid. But that problem doesn't just apply to SM.
And offtoptic, but I have to mention it. Why, since a month or so ago, do I have to use <P><P> for my first paragraph break but just a single <P> thereafter. It's very annoying!
Do you have an actual contribution to make here? Nobody believes the Standard Model to be fundamental in the way that GR or QM appear to be fundamental. That's why the Standard Model has such a boring name. It's just the lowest common denominator model that fits a large proportion of observed subatomic particle behavior. It doesn't even pretend to cover gravity and everyone in the physics world, and their dog, thinks that 19 free variables is a little excessive.
I can't imagine how anyone can get in a stew over noticing common knowledge like this.
some people play games as digital puzzles, brain-teasers if you will. Some play them for the graphics. Some play them for story
Right. But it's worth looking at what many people have to say about story telling and I think you'll find your post's parent, considered in context, is more directed at these comments rather than a general criticism of storytelling.
Some game companies (including my employer) seem to think that their games are poor quality (oops...better not reveal my employer's name) because the storytelling isn't good enough. These people look to the movie business and see that many big effects movies suck because they have a weak story and assume that the same criticism carries over. It doesn't. Games and movies have a whole lot of different ways in which they can suck that don't relate to each other.
The game business seems to look to the movie business as a kind of more respectable big brother. So many game developers have now got it into their heads that they must try to develop things like movies. And hence they feel pressured into developing a story even though they may end up wasting resources that might better have been used for gameplay.
A nice example of the latter is the old adventure game business. Because these game developers felt that somehow what they were doing was lowbrow they renamed the genre to "interactive fiction" denying their games heritage.
Make games and be proud to make them, whether they have great graphics, great stories or great gameplay. Don't feel that somehow you have to compete with other art forms like literature and cinema on their own turf.
What is that supposed to mean? Quantum mechanics appears on undergraduate mathematics, physics and chemistry courses. Almost every university offers such courses and probably dozens, if not hundreds, of people graduate from each of these universities having completed courses in QM. I expect that a reasonable proportion of/. readers are among these people. Sure, it can be tricky stuff sometimes. But you don't need to be some kind of genius to understand it - just an average graduate. And the equations of motion are always nice and linear.
Armed with a basic knowledge of quantum mechanics you can start solving problems using little more than basic linear algebra or the theory of partial differential equations. You can start computing energy levels for simple atoms, or estimate tunneling probabilities, or derive some qualitative features of the conduction of current through crystalline materials.
Turbulent flow, on the other hand, is incredibly difficult. The usual mathematical tools (such as the theory of partial differential equations mentioned above) fail in all sorts of ways. The dynamics are nonlinear and highly sensitive to initial conditions. It's hard to derive statistical properties of the chaotic regions of the dynamics. We often have to fall back on empirically derived rules. Even in a perfect fluid that exactly satisfies the Navier-Stokes equations it is hard to make long term predictions - which is why one of the Millennium Prize problems is about these equations.
Harder than quantum mechanics? That really isn't saying much.
You don't go to Wikipedia to learn things about actively controversial subjects.
I vehemently disagree. If it's controversial then you'll learn lots from Wikipedia because you'll see the actual controversy live as it happens rather than the sanitised version you'll read 50 years later in Britannica.
Wow! Are people really claiming that an older guy under incredible stress who had a heart attack might have suffered it because of the stress? It's unbelievable that such radical people should be editing Wikipedia in such a partisan manner. Don't these kind of radicals get picked up by the FBI and sent back to whatever communist hellhole they came from? Shocking I say!
I got bored by time I reached "pink slips". Next time, could you put the punch line at the beginning so I can decide whether or not it's worth reading the rest of your comment. Thanks.
As I've said many times before, virtualization is becoming more and more important (after a hiatus of 20 years when it was the norm) and ultimately there will be more virtual PCs than PCs. This means that ultimately, any PC OS is more likely to be running on a virtual PC than a real one. At that point it makes sense that software should be written with that knowledge in mind. Ie. OSes should have an API that allows them to talk to a host machine and virtualizers should have an API that guest OSes can talk to. This could make it much cleaner to do things like cut-and-paste between different virtual machines running different OSes.
Of course it's hard to imagine MS and Linus agreeing on such an API. But this isn't a zero sum game. People might choose to install Windows because with virtualization they know they will still be able to run Linux easily. Bill Gates will still have sold you a Windows license even though you're spending most of your time running Linux. So it's in the interest of MS and Linux to figure out how to interoperate between virtual machines.
It might tip things in favor of the FBI against criminals. On the other hand, backdoors like this would easily be abusable by criminals so it'll all average out. I'd hate to see the balance of the criminal/crimefighter ecosystem upset.
The masses of the model planets would have to be PERFECTLY scaled
I'd love to know what is going through your mind at this point. Are you imagining these experimenters are planning to place nine little spheres in position around one big one and that we're going to see them orbit because of the gravitational forces between these spheres?
In a world that is in chaos politically, socially and environmentally, how can the human race sustain another 100 years?
What's wrong with chaos? In what way is chaos incompatible with survival? And at what point in history were humans not in political, social and environmental chaos?
When you're playing scrabble, and you're holding B,I,O, and someone else just played DIESEL, and the B could go down on a triple word score, you won't be asking why it's a big deal.
Are you claiming this as evidence of racism? West Germans were worried about supporting East Germans before unification. This had nothing to do with race and everything to do with people wanting to keep their jobs and not wanting an additional financial burden.
Eh? It saves battery power by rebooting while I'm using it?
Since the latest updater I've also had it ignore my button presses for extended periods of time. Before the update it frequently would fail to load the album cover image. (I don't know if that's now fixed.) When I first bought it the user interface used to get into a complete mess with it getting stuck in one of the modes until I went back 'up' the menu (by 'mode' I mean displaying one of track name with volume, track name with time, track name with star rating or album cover.)
I love my nano, but I'm not so blind that I can't see its imperfections. And at least it only takes about 3 seconds to reboot.
Slashdot Mirror
Maybe the problem you point out is in the popular press. They have a habit of making science stories seem absolute, and then take great delight in reporting when these absolutes no longer seem to be valid. But that problem doesn't just apply to SM.
And offtoptic, but I have to mention it. Why, since a month or so ago, do I have to use <P><P> for my first paragraph break but just a single <P> thereafter. It's very annoying!
I can't imagine how anyone can get in a stew over noticing common knowledge like this.
Some game companies (including my employer) seem to think that their games are poor quality (oops...better not reveal my employer's name) because the storytelling isn't good enough. These people look to the movie business and see that many big effects movies suck because they have a weak story and assume that the same criticism carries over. It doesn't. Games and movies have a whole lot of different ways in which they can suck that don't relate to each other.
The game business seems to look to the movie business as a kind of more respectable big brother. So many game developers have now got it into their heads that they must try to develop things like movies. And hence they feel pressured into developing a story even though they may end up wasting resources that might better have been used for gameplay.
A nice example of the latter is the old adventure game business. Because these game developers felt that somehow what they were doing was lowbrow they renamed the genre to "interactive fiction" denying their games heritage.
Make games and be proud to make them, whether they have great graphics, great stories or great gameplay. Don't feel that somehow you have to compete with other art forms like literature and cinema on their own turf.
I make heavy use of the scientific sections and so I find it makes an excellent encyclopedia. I guess YMMV.
Armed with a basic knowledge of quantum mechanics you can start solving problems using little more than basic linear algebra or the theory of partial differential equations. You can start computing energy levels for simple atoms, or estimate tunneling probabilities, or derive some qualitative features of the conduction of current through crystalline materials.
Turbulent flow, on the other hand, is incredibly difficult. The usual mathematical tools (such as the theory of partial differential equations mentioned above) fail in all sorts of ways. The dynamics are nonlinear and highly sensitive to initial conditions. It's hard to derive statistical properties of the chaotic regions of the dynamics. We often have to fall back on empirically derived rules. Even in a perfect fluid that exactly satisfies the Navier-Stokes equations it is hard to make long term predictions - which is why one of the Millennium Prize problems is about these equations.
Harder than quantum mechanics? That really isn't saying much.
Can you direct me to the page on the Wikipedia web site where it makes this claim?
Wow! Are people really claiming that an older guy under incredible stress who had a heart attack might have suffered it because of the stress? It's unbelievable that such radical people should be editing Wikipedia in such a partisan manner. Don't these kind of radicals get picked up by the FBI and sent back to whatever communist hellhole they came from? Shocking I say!
I got bored by time I reached "pink slips". Next time, could you put the punch line at the beginning so I can decide whether or not it's worth reading the rest of your comment. Thanks.
...from Assholes On Line. Like how SGI renamed themselves from Silicon Graphics Inc.
Of course it's hard to imagine MS and Linus agreeing on such an API. But this isn't a zero sum game. People might choose to install Windows because with virtualization they know they will still be able to run Linux easily. Bill Gates will still have sold you a Windows license even though you're spending most of your time running Linux. So it's in the interest of MS and Linux to figure out how to interoperate between virtual machines.
It might tip things in favor of the FBI against criminals. On the other hand, backdoors like this would easily be abusable by criminals so it'll all average out. I'd hate to see the balance of the criminal/crimefighter ecosystem upset.
...Cavendish's classic experiment. I look forward to seeing the results.
When you're playing scrabble, and you're holding B,I,O, and someone else just played DIESEL, and the B could go down on a triple word score, you won't be asking why it's a big deal.
The software vendor could provide the $1 bill - that way guaranteeing it exists. Seems like it could work to me.
Are you claiming this as evidence of racism? West Germans were worried about supporting East Germans before unification. This had nothing to do with race and everything to do with people wanting to keep their jobs and not wanting an additional financial burden.
..."I wouldn't use AOL even if it were free" and people would know that I really meant it. Now I'm waiting for AOL to pay me to use it.
't' and 'th' both represent dentals. The ?h combinations like ch, sh, gh (as in tough) and th are all fricatives. So there is a kind of logic to it.
'TH' looks exactly like it sounds to me. Try getting your eyes tested. Or is it your ears?
Since the latest updater I've also had it ignore my button presses for extended periods of time. Before the update it frequently would fail to load the album cover image. (I don't know if that's now fixed.) When I first bought it the user interface used to get into a complete mess with it getting stuck in one of the modes until I went back 'up' the menu (by 'mode' I mean displaying one of track name with volume, track name with time, track name with star rating or album cover.)
I love my nano, but I'm not so blind that I can't see its imperfections. And at least it only takes about 3 seconds to reboot.