Posts Tagged ‘science’
Another day, another New York Times report on bad practice in biomedical science. The growing problems with scientific research are by now well known: Many results in the top journals are cherry picked, methodological weaknesses and other important caveats are often swept under the rug, and a large fraction of findings cannot be replicated. In some rare cases, there is even outright fraud.
According to Discovery Warp Drive Engine Would Travel Faster Than Light “You just wouldn’t travel faster than light.” It’s apparently the space around the ship which is travelling faster than light, the ship itself would remain stationary.
Everybody has some kind of believe in conspiracies, whether they are based on true or false data. The ability to see connections in the world around us is something that led to modern science as we know it. Scientific American reports that Anecdotal Evidence Can Undermine Scientific Results and make us believe there are connections that can’t be substantiated by scientific method.
Our brains have evolved so that they “… pay attention to anecdotes, false positives (believing there is a connection between A and B when there is not) are usually harmless, whereas false negatives (believing there is no connection between A and B when there is) may take you out of the gene pool.“
But I still don’t know who was on the grassy knoll.
In the article A dash of lime — a new twist that may cut CO2 levels back to pre-industrial levels they go into the details of removing CO2 from the air by adding lime to seawater. “Adding lime to seawater increases alkalinity, boosting seawater’s ability to absorb CO2 from air and reducing the tendency to release it back again. … The process of making lime generates CO2, but adding the lime to seawater absorbs almost twice as much CO2. The overall process is therefore ‘carbon negative’. ” There is a nice Open Source project Cquestrate.
So we have a problem of our own creation, a problem from introducing too much of one chemical into the environment. The solution might be to pour a different chemical into the sea to fix the problem. It could also be completely misguided.
Your beautiful kitchen could be poisoning you! I though it was very funny when I started reading it. “Granite, as it turns out, contains levels of uranium, which is not only radioactive but releases radon gas as it decays.1” According to the article it can also contain other nuclear materials such as thorium and potassium, although I can’t exactly remember when potassium became nuclear.
I just read Testing “spooky action-at-a-distance” on the International Space Station, which is quite an old article. I was lead there because I was Meta-Moderating on /.. I can’t believe that somebody had rated the following comment as Insightful:
He’s suggesting using entanglement to communicate faster than light. I think he’s forgetting that once your manipulate the photon, it will no longer be in sync with its pair.
It’s as if this person didn’t read the first line in the article explaining:
Entanglement is the strange and beautiful property of certain quantum particles to become so deeply linked that they share the same existence. According to quantum theory, that link should be maintained whatever the distance between the particles, whether the width of an atom or the diameter of the universe.
In other words if you manipulate it in one place it will change in the other, how could it otherwise be quantum entangled. He is confusing changing the photon’s spin in Quantum Encryption, which allows Alice and Bob to see whether the message has been tampered with, and Quantum Entanglement.
Now I don’t claim to understand Quantum Physics, and I understand confusing Quantum Encryption with Quantum Entanglement. Just read the first line of the article already! *sigh*