IBM takes first 3D image of atomic bonds • Hacker News Board

Re: IBM takes first 3D image of atomic bonds

#61

Post by antaeos » Fri, Aug 28, 2009, 4:43 PM UTC

asdlfj2sd33 wrote: post #59

jwecker wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So if I'm a gold atom, and I absorb some photons, a bunch pass through me, and some get reflected - and the photons that are reflected from me over a period of time happen to be average out to something a cone cell in the retina would interpret as gold- couldn't I say that I'm gold-colored? In other words, replacing the billion-atom aggregation with a simple time series? It seems to me it's an argument about semantic…

Ah but protons aren't particles... except some times they are, other times they are a waves. The bottom line is individual atoms don't reflect protons.

Did you mean photons?

Re: IBM takes first 3D image of atomic bonds

#62

Post by sho » Fri, Aug 28, 2009, 9:50 PM UTC

TriinT wrote: post #32

sho wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sigh, when you find the answer to that question, let me know ...

They will never sell Chanel No. 5 in gas stations because it would cheapen it. Likewise, a blog that tolerates retarded trollish comments looks cheap. If I were one of the IBM scientists who worked on that project, I would hate to have my work publicized by a blog as distasteful as Gizmodo. Call me elitist if you will. BTW, my question was rhetorical.

If you're elitist, it's in a good way. I agree.

Re: IBM takes first 3D image of atomic bonds

#63

Post by asdlfj2sd33 » Fri, Aug 28, 2009, 11:10 PM UTC

antaeos wrote: post #61

asdlfj2sd33 wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Ah but protons aren't particles... except some times they are, other times they are a waves. The bottom line is individual atoms don't reflect protons.

Did you mean photons?

Embarrassingly, yes. Obviously I can neither type nor spell well.