Monthly Archives: February 2008

Nanofear

Posted on by

Nanotechnology isn’t morally acceptable to a lot of people.

My immediate reaction, after playing “what the?” is that this is a reaction from ignorance. I mentioned before that many people get visions of nanobots taking over the world dancing in their heads when you mention the word “nanotechnology” so I suspect this is just a simple reaction. It’s unknown, so I am suspicious and am predisposed to rejecting the idea. Calling it immoral is just an easy way to reject it, requiring little thought.

Of course it’s ignorant, because most of the respondents probably have a computer, which has nanoscale components in it. And use other nanotech products, perhaps even on a daily basis.

I’m not sure how the pollster draws the religious conclusions, because the poll questions aren’t given and we only have his word that the people were well-informed adults. I don’t trust polls, especially ones that are opaque.

Gazing Into the Relative Past

Posted on by

Came across a great post entitled “The Pre-history of Einstein’s Relativity” over at Skulls in the Stars.

It starts with Galileo and the notions he had to overturn, and progresses through Newton and through to about 1900 1880.

Regarding Newton and relativity,

The first excerpt observes that understandings of space, time and motion that arise from everyday experience lead one to certain ‘prejudices’, or misunderstandings, about the nature of these quantities. In particular, there is a confusion concerning the ideas of ‘absolute’ and ‘relative’ motion. These seem to be the same misconceptions we discussed earlier in the context of Galileo’s work.

Which applies to a whole bunch of physics, especially quantum mechanics, in addition to relativity.

(via Science After Sunclipse)

Added 2-20: next installment, in-depth Newtonian Ralativity

Let Us Hope It Does Not Become Widely Known

Posted on by

So tachyons enter the conversation at SFN once again, and I was looking over the wikipedia article

And it says, in part, “the same formulae that apply to regular slower-than-light particles (“bradyons”) also apply to tachyons”

Bradyons? That’s a new one on me.

Obviously there are two types, or genders. They show bunching behavior. The first generation has one particle while the second generation has three. One gender has the property of brown hair, while the other is gold. The last one in the second generation in curls. And then there’s the interaction-regulator, or “housekeeper” particle, known as “Alice.” (OK, I recently saw the scene in “Hot Shots” where they are using the Brady Bunch theme as a cadence, so I still had this in the buffer somewhere)

But really, I wanted to know if I was out of the loop or if something was funny here. I know there are plenty of terms in particle physics that aren’t particularly familiar, but tachyons are recognized in a much wider circle. So why hadn’t I heard of bradyons before? (At first I thought it was a typo and bad physics, and the author meant baryon. But that was not it.) When I Googled I got about 4,200 hits for bradyon (and, while I got more than 2,000,000 for tachyon, many of the bradyon hits I saw were discussing the validity of the term or not about physics. Tachyon probably isn’t anyone’s name — though I readily admit to underestimating the “creativity” of some folks in naming their children) but there’s probably a lot of sci-fi hits. A Google scholar search shows 141 hits, spread out in time with some dating back to 1974, but about 8,500 for tachyon.

So I suspect it’s someone who keeps interjecting the term, hoping it will catch on, and the wikipedia pages are just another attempt, trying to draw attention to it.

I suspect Jan.

Unlimited Cake and Ice Cream

Posted on by

The first law of thermodynamics: Energy can neither be created nor destroyed. Pretty straightforward. No loopholes.

So why does a press release from Los Alamos sound like it’s ignoring the first law of thermodynamics after painting the room green?

Los Alamos National Laboratory has developed a low-risk, transformational concept, called Green Freedom™, for large-scale production of carbon-neutral, sulfur-free fuels and organic chemicals from air and water.

Sounds great, doesn’t it? Carbon-neutral fuel. Wow, just what the doctor ordered.

By integrating this electrochemical process with existing technology, researchers have developed a new, practical approach to producing fuels and organic chemicals that permits continued use of existing industrial and transportation infrastructure. Fuel production is driven by carbon-neutral power.

OK, no actual mention of the electrochemical process in the PR, but elsewhere it’s given as methanol production from water and carbon dioxide.

So it must be the reverse of 2 CH3OH + 3 O2 → 2 CO2 + 4 H2O

Which is going to require energy input, because the combustion of methanol is exothermic. Ah, hence the mention of the fuel production being driven by a carbon-neutral source. Recognize that? It’s the same handwave that was happening with hydrogen a few years back. It’s not an energy source, but at least it’s green … as long as you use a green source of energy.

If we had some cake we could have cake and ice cream. If we had some ice cream.
Continue reading →

If You Have To Teleport Me, Then I Don't Wanna Go…

Posted on by

Aldebaran’s great, okay,
Algol’s pretty neat,
Betelgeuse’s pretty girls
Will knock you off your feet.
They’ll do anything you like
Real fast and then real slow,
But if you have to take me apart to get me there
Then I don’t want to go.

[Chorus]

Take me apart, take me apart,
What a way to roam
And if you have to take me apart to get me there
I’d rather stay at home.
— Douglas Adams, “The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy”

Another recurring theme on the SFN forums is quantum teleportation, along with quantum entanglement. Quantum teleportation is all about sending information, not matter.

Jeff Kimble explains some truths about teleportation

Let's Geek It UP!

Posted on by

Mar 14th is “Talk like a physicist day,” and there’s a blog dedicated to it. Of course, I’ll be doing so anyway, because that’s what I do. My suggestion is to get familiar with some jargon, and substitute it for smaller words whenever and wherever possible. That’s what we do.

technojargon

(Of course Mar 14th is also Einstein’s birthday and “Pi day” in the US)

Via Cocktail Party Physics

Things I Don't Understand, part MCDLXVII

Posted on by

Why does Arlen Specter care that Bill Belichick has been taping since 2000? He’s all upset that the NFL destroyed tapes, but as far as I can tell, it was the existence of the tapes, not their content, that was the problem. Belichick and the Pats were found guilty and penalized. Why not destroy the tapes? Doesn’t Specter have anything better to do?

I'm Off…to do Humanitarian Deeds

Posted on by

Because I’m gonna be rich.

This is a new one for me. I’ve won the lottery, been asked to assist in moving money out of Nigeria, been asked to pose as a dead person to collect an inheritance. But now there’s this:

“On behalf of the Trustees and Executor of the estate of Late Engr.Lurther Braeunlich, I once
again try to notify you as my earlier letter returned undelivered. Late Engr.Lurther
Braeunlich made you a beneficiary to his WILL. He left the sum ($9,100.000.00 USD) to you in
the codicil and last testament to his WILL.

Engr.Lurther Braeunlich until his death was a member of the Helicopter Society and the
Institute of Electronic & Electrical Engineers.

Late Engr. Maxwell Effenberg died on the 13th day of December,2006 at the age of 80 years,
and his WILL is now ready for execution.

According to him this money is to support your humanitarian activities and to help the poor and
the needy in our society.

Please if I reach you this time as I am hopeful, endeavor to get back
to me as soon as possible via the email below, to enable me
conclude my job.”

Apparently the spamtards can’t even cut-and-paste properly — they switched decedents in the middle of the email. First it’s “Lurther Braeunlich” and later it’s “Maxwell Effenberg” (who left $13.1 million to his acquaintences. I feel slighted)

The passing of Lurther (sic) doesn’t show up in Google … yet.