Go Back   Freethought Forum > The Marketplace > The Sciences

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 08-25-2012, 12:24 PM
LadyShea's Avatar
LadyShea LadyShea is offline
I said it, so I feel it, dick
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Here
Posts: XXXMDCCCXCVII
Images: 41
Default Drive by science

I think we need a Miscellany thread for science stuff we come across. This is it.

Harvard makes distortion-free lens from gold and silicon, aims for the perfect image (or signal) -- Engadget
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
ceptimus (08-25-2012), Ensign Steve (08-25-2012), Janet (08-29-2012), Kael (08-25-2012), Kashmir (08-26-2012), naturalist.atheist (08-25-2012), Shelli (08-25-2012), Stormlight (09-24-2012)
  #2  
Old 08-25-2012, 05:03 PM
naturalist.atheist naturalist.atheist is offline
Reality Adventurer
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: VMMCXXX
Images: 7
Default Re: Drive by science

Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyShea View Post
I think we need a Miscellany thread for science stuff we come across. This is it.

Harvard makes distortion-free lens from gold and silicon, aims for the perfect image (or signal) -- Engadget
Wouldn't it be cool if the micro antennas could be altered in situ to produce a completely solid state zoom lens?
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
LadyShea (08-27-2012)
  #3  
Old 08-26-2012, 09:02 PM
Kashmir Kashmir is offline
ellipsis . . .
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: MCCXCVI
Default Re: Drive by science

Hey, it's an example of phased-array optics.
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
LadyShea (08-27-2012)
  #4  
Old 08-27-2012, 07:12 PM
LadyShea's Avatar
LadyShea LadyShea is offline
I said it, so I feel it, dick
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Here
Posts: XXXMDCCCXCVII
Images: 41
Default Re: Drive by science

Whoa, didn't see this coming at all. I assumed the opposite.

Pediatrics group says circumcision's benefits outweigh risks amid U.S. decline in procedure
Quote:
The health benefits from male circumcision outweigh the risks, says the American Academy of Pediatrics in its latest guidelines on the controversial procedure published Monday.
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
SR71 (08-30-2012)
  #5  
Old 08-30-2012, 10:30 AM
But's Avatar
But But is offline
This is the title that appears beneath your name on your posts.
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: MVDCXV
Default Re: Drive by science

Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyShea View Post
Whoa, didn't see this coming at all. I assumed the opposite.

Pediatrics group says circumcision's benefits outweigh risks amid U.S. decline in procedure
Quote:
The health benefits from male circumcision outweigh the risks, says the American Academy of Pediatrics in its latest guidelines on the controversial procedure published Monday.
Are you serious? Membership in that group is, I guess, the thing that's most strongly correlated with making money off the ritual. Hence the information content of their statement is close to zero. I would put them in the category of every other group that's about to lose an existing source of income and trying to prevent that. In terms of bias, that's where the most aggressive lobby groups are to be found.

[eta: never mind. That was probably sarcasm failure on my part.]
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
LadyShea (10-10-2015)
  #6  
Old 08-29-2012, 11:12 PM
lisarea's Avatar
lisarea lisarea is offline
Solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: XVMDCLXXXVII
Blog Entries: 1
Images: 3
Default Re: Drive by science

This is more about science reporting than science proper, but it's still good:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6QdD96OZFzA#!

(He also has a cool story about the time he robbed a bank, but it's not very sciencey.)
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Kael (08-30-2012), LadyShea (08-30-2012), SR71 (08-30-2012), Stormlight (09-24-2012)
  #7  
Old 09-18-2012, 07:10 PM
LadyShea's Avatar
LadyShea LadyShea is offline
I said it, so I feel it, dick
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Here
Posts: XXXMDCCCXCVII
Images: 41
Default Re: Drive by science

Dark Energy Camera: Sizing up the universe in pictures - latimes.com
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old 09-18-2012, 09:06 PM
ceptimus's Avatar
ceptimus ceptimus is offline
puzzler
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: UK
Posts: XVCDXI
Images: 28
Default Re: Drive by science

http://m.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old 09-18-2012, 09:48 PM
slimshady2357's Avatar
slimshady2357 slimshady2357 is offline
forever in search of dill pickle doritos
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: MVCMLIV
Blog Entries: 6
Images: 52
Default Re: Drive by science


:kirk:

'Warp drive' may be more feasible than thought, scientists say | Fox News
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
ceptimus (09-19-2012), Crumb (09-18-2012), Ensign Steve (09-18-2012), Kael (09-19-2012), LadyShea (10-02-2012), MonCapitan2002 (09-23-2012)
  #10  
Old 09-18-2012, 10:06 PM
Ari's Avatar
Ari Ari is offline
I read some of your foolish scree, then just skimmed the rest.
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bay Area
Gender: Male
Posts: MXDCLXIX
Blog Entries: 8
Default Re: Drive by science


Fuck Yeah Fluid Dynamics Tumblr
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Ensign Steve (09-18-2012), LadyShea (10-02-2012)
  #11  
Old 09-23-2012, 08:12 AM
MonCapitan2002's Avatar
MonCapitan2002 MonCapitan2002 is offline
Servant of the Dark Lord
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Gender: Bender
Posts: VMMMCLXXIV
Blog Entries: 12
Images: 1
Default Re: Drive by science

I wanted to share a video I came across on YouTube of Neil DeGrasse Tyson giving a lecture during Beyond Belief 2006.

Neil DeGrasse Tyson - Greatest Sermon Ever - YouTube

It almost comes across as a sermon. His passion for the sciences is both palpable and infectious. I wish I had heard of him 15 to 20 years ago.
__________________

Allan Glenn. 1984-2005 RIP
:countsheep::countsheep::countsheep::countsheep::countsheep::countsheep::countsheep::countsheep::countsheep::countsheep::countsheep:
Under no circumstances should Quentin Tarantino be allowed to befoul Star Trek.
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
LadyShea (10-02-2012)
  #12  
Old 09-27-2012, 12:08 AM
Crumb's Avatar
Crumb Crumb is offline
Cmurb!
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Cascadia
Gender: Male
Blog Entries: 22
Images: 355
Default Re: Drive by science

There might be a very cool comet in our future. :)

http://www.astronomynow.com/news/n12...yVuJI.facebook
__________________
:joecool2: :cascadia: :ROR: :portland: :joecool2:
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
ceptimus (09-27-2012), Demimonde (09-27-2012), LadyShea (10-02-2012), MonCapitan2002 (09-29-2012), slimshady2357 (09-27-2012)
  #13  
Old 09-30-2012, 11:32 PM
livius drusus's Avatar
livius drusus livius drusus is offline
Admin of THIEVES and SLUGABEDS
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: LVCCCLXXII
Images: 5
Default Re: Drive by science

Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Angakuk (10-01-2012), Ari (10-01-2012), Crumb (10-01-2012), Ensign Steve (10-01-2012), Kael (10-01-2012), LadyShea (10-02-2012)
  #14  
Old 10-01-2012, 12:24 AM
Ensign Steve's Avatar
Ensign Steve Ensign Steve is offline
more of a before rehab friend
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Silicon Valley
Gender: Bender
Posts: XXXCLXXXIII
Images: 66
Default Re: Drive by science

I'm no physicist or anything...

__________________
:kiwf::smurf:
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old 10-01-2012, 12:33 AM
BrotherMan's Avatar
BrotherMan BrotherMan is offline
A Very Gentle Bort
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bortlandia
Gender: Male
Posts: XVDCLXXXI
Blog Entries: 5
Images: 63
Default Re: Drive by science

I read the explanation when I first saw the video. I'm no rememberator, but I call it explosive rebound. Some portion of the explosive force pushed downward through the can, hitting the solid floor beneath and then reflecting enough of the remaining energy back into the can causing it to lift off the ground like it did.

I'm sure we have a scientist on staff who can tell me how wrong I am.
__________________
\V/_
I COVLD TEACh YOV BVT I MVST LEVY A FEE
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Ari (10-02-2012), Ensign Steve (10-01-2012), LadyShea (10-01-2012), livius drusus (10-01-2012)
  #16  
Old 10-02-2012, 06:43 PM
LadyShea's Avatar
LadyShea LadyShea is offline
I said it, so I feel it, dick
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Here
Posts: XXXMDCCCXCVII
Images: 41
Default Re: Drive by science

Half of Great Barrer Reef lost in past 3 decades - CBS News
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
The Lone Ranger (10-15-2012)
  #17  
Old 10-03-2012, 05:58 PM
MonCapitan2002's Avatar
MonCapitan2002 MonCapitan2002 is offline
Servant of the Dark Lord
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Gender: Bender
Posts: VMMMCLXXIV
Blog Entries: 12
Images: 1
Sad Re: Drive by science

That really sucks. The article depressed me a little.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Linked Article
The experts agree that doing nothing is not an option at this point. "The problem is entirely soluble, and coral reefs can be saved through concerted effort over this and the following two or three generations," said Kaufman. "There is absolutely no excuse for failure to do this, and if we do fail our generation will forever be remembered for unimaginable, unforgivable stupidity and sloth."
If that happens, then truer words were never spoken. I can't help but think our last few generations have done a damn good job of fucking over the planet.
__________________

Allan Glenn. 1984-2005 RIP
:countsheep::countsheep::countsheep::countsheep::countsheep::countsheep::countsheep::countsheep::countsheep::countsheep::countsheep:
Under no circumstances should Quentin Tarantino be allowed to befoul Star Trek.
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
LadyShea (10-10-2012), The Lone Ranger (10-15-2012)
  #18  
Old 10-10-2012, 08:40 PM
LadyShea's Avatar
LadyShea LadyShea is offline
I said it, so I feel it, dick
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Here
Posts: XXXMDCCCXCVII
Images: 41
Default Re: Drive by science

Is lightspeed really a limit? • The Register
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Ensign Steve (04-13-2016)
  #19  
Old 10-15-2012, 09:25 PM
slimshady2357's Avatar
slimshady2357 slimshady2357 is offline
forever in search of dill pickle doritos
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: MVCMLIV
Blog Entries: 6
Images: 52
Default Re: Drive by science


:user:

Physicists May Have Evidence Universe Is A Computer Simulation
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
LadyShea (11-25-2012)
  #20  
Old 10-15-2012, 10:14 PM
The Lone Ranger's Avatar
The Lone Ranger The Lone Ranger is offline
Jin, Gi, Rei, Ko, Chi, Shin, Tei
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: MXCDX
Images: 523
Default Re: Drive by science

Yeah, that's the sort of thing that can make you a little crazy, if you think about it too much.

It's something that computer scientists like to point out. The basic idea, as I understand it, goes like this:
  1. A sufficiently sophisticated computer could run a simulation of the Universe.
  2. There are potentially lots of computers out there running simulated Universes.
  3. There is only one real Universe.
  4. Therefore it is more probable that we are living in a computer-simulated Universe than that we're living in the real one.
  5. Sleepless nights ensue.
__________________
The greatest way to live with honor in this world is to be what we pretend to be.
-- Socrates
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Dingfod (10-26-2012), Janet (10-16-2012)
  #21  
Old 10-16-2012, 03:02 AM
naturalist.atheist naturalist.atheist is offline
Reality Adventurer
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: VMMCXXX
Images: 7
Default Re: Drive by science

It is interesting to note that it wouldn't take that many qbits to compute the universe. On the order of a thousand. It's almost recursive in that it appears the universe is basically quantum and quantum computers of modest size could in theory compute the universe.
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
The Lone Ranger (10-16-2012)
  #22  
Old 10-16-2012, 07:43 AM
But's Avatar
But But is offline
This is the title that appears beneath your name on your posts.
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: MVDCXV
Default Re: Drive by science

Quote:
Originally Posted by naturalist.atheist View Post
It is interesting to note that it wouldn't take that many qbits to compute the universe. On the order of a thousand. It's almost recursive in that it appears the universe is basically quantum and quantum computers of modest size could in theory compute the universe.
No, quantum computers of modest size can simulate quantum systems of modest size. So maybe, maybe you could simulate a classical version of the universe (of course there is no such thing) but you can't get most of the answers out (you only get to measure once). To simulate a universe of qubits, you need a universe of qubits. Or more time. What you can get rid of is the exponential slowdown, which is huge.
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Dragar (10-16-2012)
  #23  
Old 10-16-2012, 04:17 AM
davidm's Avatar
davidm davidm is offline
Spiffiest wanger
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Blog Entries: 3
Default Re: Drive by science

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Lone Ranger View Post
Yeah, that's the sort of thing that can make you a little crazy, if you think about it too much.

It's something that computer scientists like to point out. The basic idea, as I understand it, goes like this:
  1. A sufficiently sophisticated computer could run a simulation of the Universe.
  2. There are potentially lots of computers out there running simulated Universes.
  3. There is only one real Universe.
  4. Therefore it is more probable that we are living in a computer-simulated Universe than that we're living in the real one.
  5. Sleepless nights ensue.
Right, it is Nick Bostrom's simulation argument.
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
The Lone Ranger (10-18-2012)
  #24  
Old 03-30-2016, 03:23 AM
LarsMac's Avatar
LarsMac LarsMac is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Posts: XXIV
Default Re: Drive by science

Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyShea View Post
Always wondered about that, but never been very good with the Math.
I mean, after all, velocity is always relative, right? And, then there is the whole Time Dilation thing.
I reckon it will be a few more years before we can get any meaningful data on all that.
Suppose I won't get to see it.
Now, I'm REALLY bummed.
__________________
Control is an illusion. The chaos is part of the fun.
-Susan Hatty Steinspar
Reply With Quote
Thanks, from:
Ensign Steve (04-13-2016), Stormlight (03-30-2016)
  #25  
Old 04-13-2016, 09:38 PM
Ensign Steve's Avatar
Ensign Steve Ensign Steve is offline
more of a before rehab friend
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Silicon Valley
Gender: Bender
Posts: XXXCLXXXIII
Images: 66
Default Re: Drive by science

Quote:
Originally Posted by LarsMac View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by LadyShea View Post
Always wondered about that, but never been very good with the Math.
I mean, after all, velocity is always relative, right? And, then there is the whole Time Dilation thing.
I reckon it will be a few more years before we can get any meaningful data on all that.
Suppose I won't get to see it.
Now, I'm REALLY bummed.
Wow, that's a link to a 4 year old post (did that FTL neutrino thing really happen that long ago?), but I still has questions for the physicists.

FTA:
Quote:

Outside the box: Einstein's Special Relativity works inside the smallest square.
The University of Adelaide researchers have extended the mathematics
to a world beyond Einstein's limit. Image provided by Professor Jim Hill

...

4. To clear up a confusion regarding the labelling of the image. One velocity v refers to the velocity of the first observer; u refers to the velocity of the second observer.
Okay, but that doesn't clear up my confusion regarding what the capital U represents. I'm assuming it is the difference in velocities, v minus u, or I suppose that's called the relative velocity.

Since the values are scalar, does it suggest the observers are moving directly toward or away from each other along the same vector? If so, is that a simplifying assumption? Does it matter for our purposes? (Or am I totally missing some essential aspect of relativity where the direction is relative too?)

Okay, so looking at the the center square in isolation, the purple part is where v > -u (positive U implies observers are moving away from each other?), and the green part is where v < -u (negative U implies observers are moving toward each other?). Looking at my drawings, that only works about half the time and it depends on where they "start" "relative" (teehee) to each other. Two objects that start moving toward each other will switch to moving away from each other when they pass each other (assuming no collision, obviously) with no change to their individual or relative velocities. So what's the point of positive and negative U in this chart? What is a negative relative velocity? Would absolute values work as well? Isn't the sign on U completely arbitrary, depending on which observer you pick to be u vs. v?

That wasn't even my original question!

Okay, so. Looking at the purple half of the center square in isolation. I get it. If both observers are moving at almost c, in opposite directions, their relative velocity will still max out at c. No problem, that's special relativity.

Then, according this cool chart, if u is moving at almost c and v is moving at greater than c (the orange bits), then their relative velocity will be greater than c. Okay, sure, why not.

But! We have another purple square at the top right. If both observers are moving at greater than c, in opposite directions, their relative velocity is once again constrained to be less than c? What in the fuck is up with that?

I'm not even going to try to parse the rest of this graph, with its cool curves (even tho I rly rly want to!) until I can understand the purple and green parts first.
__________________
:kiwf::smurf:

Last edited by Ensign Steve; 04-13-2016 at 09:55 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

  Freethought Forum > The Marketplace > The Sciences


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

 

All times are GMT +1. The time now is 08:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Page generated in 1.30863 seconds with 14 queries